Click here to read the PDF version of this e-newsletter

As multiple international agencies adopt and update their social and environmental policies” this special edition Forest Peoples Programme E-Newsletter reviews experiences of communities and civil society with the safeguard policies of various international financial institutions.

 

The E-Newsletter contains articles on indigenous peoples’ experiences with safeguards in Asia” Peru and Central Africa” emphasising the importance of robust safeguard frameworks to ensure that development finance does no harm to people and the environment. It also features articles on safeguard issues at the World Bank; the Brazilian Development Bank; the African Development Bank; in forest and climate financing schemes and in the private sector.

 

–Forest Peoples Programme

 

________________________________________

Introduction: Why safeguards matter

So-called “safeguard standards” for international finance institutions emerged as a consequence of destructive forestry” agricultural colonisation and extractive megaprojects financed by the World Bank in the Amazon” Indonesia and India in the 1970s and 1980s. Since then many other multilateral development banks and development agencies have adopted their own safeguard policies and related complaints mechanisms. In addition to the need to protect community rights from destructive development investments” it is increasingly recognised that even well-intentioned conservation and ‘community development’ projects can cause damage and violate rights if they are poorly designed and fail to protect human rights and fragile habitats. Read more

INDIGENOUS PEOPLES’ EXPERIENCES WITH SAFEGUARDS:
 
The experience of Asian indigenous peoples with the finance lending policies of international financial institutions: A select overview 

Projects and programme interventions of multilateral development banks have a record of systematic and widespread human rights violations for indigenous peoples in Asia. In many countries” indigenous peoples have been subjected to widespread displacement and irreversible loss of traditional livelihoods. Behind these human rights violations is the denial of indigenous peoples’ rights to their lands” territories and resources and to their right to give their free” prior and informed consent (FPIC) to projects and programme interventions” including those in the name of sustainable development and human development. Among them” the large infrastructure (dams and highway construction) and environmental “conservation” projects have had the most detrimental adverse impacts on indigenous peoples. Read more
 
The IDB” Camisea and Peru: A sorry” sorry safeguards story

The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) played a catalytic role in the development of the Camisea gas project in the Peruvian Amazon in 2002/2003 despite having no specific policy for projects impacting indigenous peoples. When the Bank adopted one in 2006″ a key provision on isolated peoples was ignored when it made a US$400m loan the following year. Meanwhile” attempts by the Bank to ‘protect’ a reserve for indigenous peoples in ‘voluntary isolation’ directly impacted by the Camisea project have proven almost entirely ineffective and are now being further undermined by plans to expand operations within the Reserve. The IDB is required to approve these plans and could do so imminently. Read more
 
Experiences of indigenous peoples in Africa with safeguard policies: Examples from Cameroon and the Congo Basin

The notion of indigenous people has sometimes been controversial in Africa. There are some opinions that consider all Africans as indigenous people liberated from colonial powers” while others simply stress that it is very difficult to determine who is indigenous in Africa. The setting up in 2001 by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) of a Working Group on Indigenous Populations/Communities and the Group’s report submitted to and adopted by the ACHPR in 2003 have brought a new perspective to this problem. In this report for the first time there was a unanimous acceptance of the existence of indigenous peoples in Africa and this kicked off discussions on how countries could begin to integrate the rights of these peoples into the human rights mainstream. Read more
 
SAFEGUARDS AT THE WORLD BANK:
 
Forwards or backwards? The World Bank’s safeguard review and update (2012-14)

The World Bank is currently undertaking a two-year “review and update” of eight of its ten social and environmental safeguard policies. NGOs have highlighted how the World Bank must use the review as an opportunity to upgrade its standards and bolster implementation and compliance systems to increase Bank accountability and deliver sustainable development outcomes. At the same time” they have raised concerns that the Bank’s plan to “consolidate” its policies” with greater emphasis on the use of country systems to address safeguard issues” could end up in weakened standards and less accountability of the Bank and borrower governments to affected communities and the public. Read more
 
The World Bank’s Palm Oil Policy

In 2011″ the World Bank Group (WBG) adopted a Framework and Strategy for investment in the palm oil sector. The new approach was adopted on the instructions of former World Bank President Robert Zoellick” after a damning audit by International Finance Corporation’s (IFC) semi-independent Compliance Advisory Ombudsman (CAO) had shown that IFC staff were financing the palm oil giant” Wilmar” without due diligence and contrary to the IFC’s Performance Standards. Wilmar is the world’s largest palm oil trader” supplying no less than 45% of globally traded palm oil. The audit” carried out in response to a series of detailed complaints from Forest Peoples Programme and partners” vindicated many of our concerns that Wilmar was expanding its operations in Indonesia in violation of legal requirements” Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) standards and IFC norms and procedures. Almost immediately after the audit was triggered” IFC divested itself of its numerous other palm oil investments in Southeast Asia. Read more
 
The World Bank’s Forest Policy 

As the World Bank reviews its environmental and social standards” a major opportunity to overhaul World Bank approach to forests must not be missed.
The negative impacts of World Bank-financed projects on tropical forests have been an issue of concern for civil society and forest peoples for decades. In the 1980s” World Bank megaprojects in the Amazon and in Indonesia in support for infrastructure projects” agricultural colonisation and transmigration generated major criticism from the public. This in turn generated the political pressure that was a key factor in leading the World Bank Group to adopt mandatory social and environmental standards” known as safeguards” to demonstrate its commitment to preventing harm to people and the environment. Read more
 
OTHER INTERNATIONAL SAFEGUARD STANDARDS:
 
The lack of an effective safeguards policy at the Brazilian Development Bank

Despite the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES) being a signatory of the Green Protocol” which ties favourable lending rates and terms to the adoption of social and environmental standards” and the Bank’s initiative to develop a specific policy for the cattle sector” the Bank’s environmental policy is still very vague and lacks transparency and concrete criteria. Read more

African Development Bank set to introduce Indigenous Peoples standards for the first time

The African Development Bank (AfDB) is nearing completion of its new set of environmental and social safeguard policies. The AfDB is currently the only multilateral development bank without a standalone safeguard policy on indigenous peoples” and the new environmental and social safeguards are not expected to change this. This is despite strong advocacy from indigenous peoples’ organisations in Africa” and despite the existing jurisprudence and standards on indigenous rights in the African human rights system. Read more

Safeguards in REDD+ financing schemes

Among the many aspects of REDD+ under close scrutiny by indigenous peoples and civil society organisations” the issue of safeguards and their implementation is the one that continues to attract the most concern. This is particularly true now in the current debate on REDD+ and its degree of implementation and operationalisation. Since 2010″ when the 16th Conference of the Parties of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change adopted its decision on REDD+ and related safeguards” a continuous process of elaborations” negotiations” and adjustments has taken place at various levels. The debate on safeguards has become both an opportunity for indigenous peoples and civil society to further enhance their calls for respect of internationally recognised rights and standards” and a leverage opportunity for donors to seek compliance for the use of funds transferred to REDD+ countries. Read more
 
Safeguards and the Private Sector: Emerging lessons from voluntary standards and commodity roundtables

Public indignation about the depredations of ill-regulated business has led to a growing recognition of the responsibilities of businesses to respect human rights” as well as the need for stronger regulations to improve the way products are made and ensure that environments and peoples’ rights are respected and protected. There is now greater awareness that what is urgently needed is strengthened environmental stewardship and land governance” reforms of land tenure” and improved enforcement of revised and just laws. Such reforms have been slow to take effect” so consumers and buyers have pressed for faster change. This has given rise to standard-setting by the private sector for the regulation of commodity production and processing to respect rights” secure favourable and sustainable livelihoods and divert pressure away from areas crucial to local livelihoods and of high conservation value. Read more