Improve systems and instruments for accountability and grievance redress. IFC, MIGA, and the World Bank should: Seek greater symmetry in the structure of WBG accountability and grievance redress mechanisms. For the World Bank this would entail creation of a grievance redress and conflict resolution mechanism to complement the IPN. For IFC and MIGA this would entail a more independent compliance review process, ensuring that the CAO submits its audits directly to the Board.
Original Response: 7.5.a) World Bank: Agreed/Ongoing. Bank Management agrees with IEG that there is value in creating a grievance redress mechanism for which Bank Management will take responsibility that is complementary to, but separate from, the Inspection Panel. Bank Management wishes to underscore that establishing this mechanism would not alter the responsibility of borrowers and recipients for implementing projects, and that in many cases, the grievances are not necessarily with the Bank, but between our clients and project-related stakeholders. Nevertheless, these grievances are often brought for resolution to the Bank. Therefore, by the end of the third quarter of fiscal 2011, Bank Management intends to complete a survey and review of a wide range of potentially analogous existing grievance redress mechanisms as a basis for designing one for the Bank. The study will include a review of the cost implications and potential cost savings that could be engendered by using a system similar to the IFC CAO or other multilateral financial institutions. Bank Management will present the results of this study to the Board to ensure that any decisions emerging from the study will be consistent with the Board Resolution and related Board decisions concerning the Inspection Panel, and in a manner which takes fully into account the current requirements and experiences with project-based grievance mechanisms (including as required under OP 4.12, Involuntary Resettlement, and OP 4.10, Indigenous Peoples). This study will be coordinated among Bank units with considerable experience in this field to ensure institutional coherence and efficiency. Timeline: Bank Management will (subject to cost considerations) establish a grievance mechanism by the first quarter of fiscal 2012, and provide to the Board a detailed report on the initial operation of the grievance mechanism by the end of fiscal 2012.
This rating is for the World Bank only. The World Bank Grievance Redress Service (GRS) has been established and was launched in January 2015, as a result of, among other things, the 2010 IEG evaluation which recommended that the Bank create such a mechanism. Since the GRS is aligned with the ongoing development of the Bank's Environmental and Social Framework, IEG rates this as substantial and active pending the roll-out of the reforms. IEG would appreciate a compendium response by Management during the next round that highlights lessons learned from the first year of implementation - detailing how the mechanism has helped to improve accountability (systems and instruments for grievance and redress), including gaps that still require filling - in order to discuss the completion of the monitoring of the recommendation.
The World Bank Grievance Redress Service (GRS) was launched in January 2015. The GRS supports Task Teams in addressing grievances from project affected communities. It provides a single entry point at the corporate level for communities to voice grievances and guidance and support for staff to help so that these complaints can be efficiently managed and resolved.
The GRS was established as a result of, among other things, a 2010 IEG evaluation which recommended that the Bank maintain such a mechanism. The GRS closes the gap between project-level grievance mechanisms and the Inspection Panel. The GRS is aligned with the ongoing development of the Banks Environmental and Social Framework as well as OPCS support for high risk operations.
The GRS contributes to the Banks overall efforts to improve stakeholder engagement and feedback from project-affected individuals and communities. By handling complaints before they escalate, it also will help to reduce costs.
The GRS does not replace project-level grievance redress mechanisms where they exist; they remain the primary tool to raise and address project-related grievances in Bank-supported operations. Likewise the GRS does not alter the role of the Inspection Panel. Project affected individuals continue to have the same access to the Panel, provided that they meet the criteria set out in the Panel Resolution and operating procedures.
Decisions on how to respond to grievances and the responsibility for doing so will remain with the Task Team. The GRS serves to coordinate and keep track of grievances. It works with the Regions and the Global Practices (GP) to follow up on their status and can provide support and advice as needed.
Access to the GRS is being advertised in project and safeguard documents, as well as on the Banks website.
IFC, MIGA, and the World Bank should: Seek greater symmetry in the structure of Bank Group accountability and grievance redress mechanisms. For the World Bank this would entail creation of a grievance redress and conflict resolution mechanism to complement the Inspection Panel. For IFC and MIGA this would entail a more independent compliance review process, ensuring that the CAO submits its audits directly to the Board.
Management has not established a separate Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM) redress but has created a Dispute Resolution and Prevention Facility (DRP) in OPCS to assist project teams utilize existing GRMs at the project or country level. Explicit guidance on how to access the GRMs and use the DRP Facility has not yet been issues, and the absence of a grievance mechanism for affected people from projects that lack GRMs is a critical omission leading to unequal treatment of people affected by different projects.
A small facility to lead this work has been established in OPCS, within the Operations Risk Management Department, with expertise in operational dispute resolution. The development of this facility has involved a review of practices used by a variety of both public and private sector parties to address operational disputes. The facility is tasked with supporting Management efforts to address potential and actual operational disputes from a risk based perspective to focus on prediction and prevention as well as resolution.
Underway is work within Bank policies and structures to provide in-house guidance to Bank staff in order to improve outcomes at the early stages of complaints and potential disputes.
The Dispute Resolution and Prevention (DRP) Facility has been created in OPCS as a means of strengthening Management's capacity in dispute resolution, and has been functioning since early 2012. The DRP Facility is seen as an alternative to the original recommendation to create a new, independent complaints handling mechanism. Management has provided two written updates to the Board on the DRP facility, including a technical briefing in November 2012. The documents submitted to the Board include a summary of mechanisms used in the public and private sector to address operational disputes and complaints which substituted for the promised exhaustive review of analogous independent mechanisms, given the decision to create the DRP facility. The DRP Facility has conducted a stock-taking exercise of grievance mechanisms - Global Review of Grievance Redress Mechanisms including grievances related to safeguard policies, and prepared a checklist on Effective Grievance Redress Mechanisms to guide discussions between WB staff and clients. IEG is informed that the DRP facility has been involved in facilitating the grievance process in specific projects in some countries including Kenya, Nepal and India. The DRP Facility's proposal to maintain a grievance log for projects is a good start as a tracking mechanism. The DRP facility has created an informational website at http: dispute resolution, and conducted clinics on grievance mechanisms in the SDN Week in early 2013. DRP has made a good beginning in addressing potential and actual operational disputes from a risk-based perspective to focus on prediction and prevention as well as resolution. Despite several encouraging initiatives by the DRP Facility, the awareness of grievance mechanisms continues to be low in the Bank and IEG urges that more opportunities for timely training events and clinics including e-learning modules are made available to project staff and clients. IEG also looks to future updates on the effectiveness of DRP Facility in grievance redressal.
A team to lead this work has been established in OPCS, within the Operations Risk Management Department, with expertise in operational dispute resolution. The Dispute Resolution and Prevention facility (DRP) has been up and running since early 2012 and is tasked with supporting operational staff in addressing potential and actual operational disputes from a risk based perspective to focus on prediction and prevention as well as resolution. Management prepared two written updates for the Board regarding the design and approach of the DRP facility (July 2011: 'strengthening Operational Grievance Management: An Update on the Process and May 2012 Addressing Grievances in Bank Operations: A Risk-Based Approach. There was also a Technical Briefing for the Board in November 2012. The two documents include a summary of mechanisms used in the public and private sector to address operational disputes and complaints, but because the decision was made to strengthen Management's capacity in dispute resolution versus create a new, independent complaints handling mechanism, Management did not prepare an exhaustive review of analogous independent mechanisms.Additional information on DRP's work is available at http:disputeresolution.
Work is underway within OPCS to provide guidance to staff on how to respond to higher-level complaints in order to improve outcomes and resolve potential conflicts earlier.
IEG's recommendation included attention to both the World Bank and IFC systems. IEG recognizes the significant efforts that have been made to introduce a new corporate Grievance Redress Service (GRS) in the World Bank and rates the uptake of this recommendation as "Medium" since the roll-out will begin in 2015. Management's response however does not include actions for IFC and MIGA. IEG recommended that for IFC and MIGA this would entail a more independent compliance review process, ensuring that the CAO submits its audits directly to the Board.
A team to lead the work on grievance redress has been established in OPCS, within the Operations Risk Management Department in early 2012. This team has been supporting operational staff in addressing potential and actual operational disputes from a risk based perspective. As of July 1, 2014 this group has been integrated and mainstreamed into the new Environmental and Social Standards (ESS) team to enhance the work on grievance redress and align with the work on Environmental and Social Standards in order to mainstreamed grievance redress into OPCS's support for high risk operations.
To allow the Bank to better respond to project related grievances Management has developed a corporate Grievance Redress Service (GRS) in OPCS. The GRS will serve as a single entry point to receive project-related complaints from project-affected individuals or communities at the corporate level and provide the internal protocol and coordination for processing such complaints. The GRS will close the existing gap in the Bank's avenues for grievance redress that currently exists between the Borrowers project-level grievance mechanisms and the Bank's Inspection Panel. The GRS will not engage directly in addressing grievances but will ensure that grievances are brought to the attention of and addressed by Task Teams and Management in a timely manner, and will support and advise teas where required and requested. It is currently planned to roll out the GRS during CY 2015. The GRS will be run with existing staff in OPCS, as an integral part of the ESS Team.
The GRS is based on the principle that project-level grievance redress mechanisms remain the primary tool to address project-related grievances and it does not represent a move away from support granted by OPCS on providing advice, support and training for implementing and improving project-level GRMs. However, the GRS will help closing a gap that currently exists in the Bank's avenues for grievance redress in that it will allow the Bank to address issues that could not be resolved at the project-level. This includes the significant number of Bank supported operations that do not have a (working) project-level GRM. The GRS will increase opportunities for Management to review and address complaints that otherwise would be escalated, including those cases where contact details or process were not known, as well as cases where the complainant wishes to raise concerns at the corporate level.
The GRS will not create any barrier or additional requirement for affected parties to access the World Bank's Inspection Panel or other avenues for grievance redress, if they wish to do so. The GRS has been discussed with the Inspection Panel which supports this initiative by Management. CODE has been informed about this work during this period.
In addition to these efforts Management has agreed with the Inspection Panel on piloting a new approach to support early solutions in the Inspection Panel process. This procedure allows for people and communities who request an inspection by the Panel to obtain early solutions to address their specific concerns about harm which they believe result from Bank financed projects. This would allow in specific cases for a swift resolution of the concerns instead of awaiting the outcome of a full compliance review. So far the early resolution pilot has been applied to the request for inspection of the Nigeria Lagos Metropolitan Development and Governance Project. Panel and Management briefed CODE on September 3, 2014 about the successful outcome of the pilot application. There was broad support from CODE members for the Panel pilot and its specific application in the Lagos case.
See more details about the pilot in Annex 1 to the Panel's new Operating procedures:
http://ewebapps.worldbank.org/apps/ip/PanelMandateDocuments/2014%20Upda…
See more details on the Lagos case:
http://ewebapps.worldbank.org/apps/ip/Pages/ViewCase.aspxCaseId=94