Revise the policy frameworks to harmonize thematic coverage and guidance across the WBG and enhance the relevance of those frameworks to client needs. IFC, MIGA, and the World Bank should jointly adopt and use a shared set of objective criteria to assess social and environmental risks to ensure adequacy and consistency in project categorization across the WBG, using the more inclusive criteria for category A, and refining the categorization system to address the bunching of higher- and lower-risk projects within the current category B. The World Bank should: Ensure adequate coverage of social effectsintegrating community and gender impacts, labor and working conditions, and health, safety, and security issues not currently covered by its safeguard policiesby consolidating existing social safeguards with other WBG policies on social risks as requirements under one umbrella policy on social sustainability. Consolidate the environmental policies as requirements under one umbrella policy on environmental sustainability. Revise the current approach to safeguards pilots on use of country systems to focus on strengthening country institutions and systems to manage environmental and social risks.
Original Response: 7.1 a) World Bank, IFC, and MIGA: Agreed. Bank, IFC, and MIGA Management will convene within the first half of fiscal 2011 a small group of senior-level environmental and social specialists to discuss approaches to either a shared set of objective criteria or alternative approaches to categorization that are more refined in scope and clearer to teams. The recommendations of this review will be factored into Bank Managements review of global good practice, which will be carried out in preparation of an overall update of Bank policies on project safeguards. IFC will consider these recommendations in its revised Sustainability Framework, which will be presented to the Board. IFC Management will provide internal guidance to staff regarding categorization as part of the update of its Environmental and Social Review Procedures, which will be finalized at the completion of the ongoing process of updating IFCs Sustainability Framework. MIGA will review its Policy on Social and Environmental Sustainability to make necessary changes and bring its categorization more in line with IFC and the Bank, after IFC revises its Sustainability Policy and proposed changes are endorsed by the Board. Timeline: In parallel with the update of Bank safeguards (see below) and following Board approval of the updated IFC Sustainability Policy and Performance Standards. 7.1.b) Disagreed. While Bank Management recognizes, as does IEG, the importance of undertaking a comprehensive updating and consolidation of its safeguard policies, it is not yet ready to agree in this detail on the final outcome of that process. Instead, taking into account IEGs analysis and consideration of IFCs Performance Standards for its private sector support in the context of the Banks public sector support, Bank Management plans to engage in a learning and consultative process with a diversity of shareholders and stakeholders on global good practice (in developing countries as well as industrial countries). Bank Management plans to complete this process in the next 24 months and then report to CODE and the Board on how it intends to further strengthen environmental and social sustainability in its projects, including presentation, for their consideration, of a policy paper setting out its updated and consolidated approach. A period of 24 months has been proposed to provide adequate time to undertake an interactive review process, develop a draft umbrella safeguard policy, prepare translations, and conduct consultations within and outside the WBG. Periodic briefings are planned to be held on a regular basis with representatives of CODE and the Board to keep them apprised of developments and to seek their guidance to the joint team as needed. Timeline: 24 months. During this process, on an interim basis, Bank Management will address concerns related to the balance between environmental and social issues by preparing and issuing guidance on the scope and coverage of social issues in the context of the preparation and implementation of environmental assessments. Timeline: Guidance issued by the end of the third quarter of fiscal 2011.
Safeguards are a fundamental part of the Bank's operational work. The broad directions of the Review and Update Process are consistent with IEG's recommendations. During this MAR period, Management has presented a second draft Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) to the Committee on Development Effectiveness (CODE) in June and July 2015, and has launched a third consultation phase, focusing on implementability of the proposed framework in borrowing countries as well as on a list of outstanding issues. Based on the feedback received during this consultation, the proposed framework is scheduled to be submitted to Executive Directors for approval in 2016.
Management presented a second draft Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) to the Committee on Development Effectiveness (CODE) in June and July 2015. This draft was the outcome of a global multi-stakeholder consultation of unprecedented scope that lasted from August 2014 to March 2015. This second draft increases harmonization with IFCs performance standards after the first draft already introduced the standard model to succeed the Banks current OP/BP model. The proposed risk categorization represents international best practice and utilizes a 4-tier system from high to substantial, moderate and low risk.
The second draft ESF proposes an extended coverage of social impacts of World Bank-funded projects, including gender (as part of the non-discrimination principle), labor and working conditions, community health and safety, stakeholder engagement, and a wide range of other social issues. The second draft ESF also systematizes and integrates the current requirements for environmental protections and extends them in accordance with IFCs Performance Standards.
The proposed draft commits the Bank to using and developing borrowers environmental and social frameworks to avoid unnecessary duplication, build national capacity and achieve development outcomes that are materially consistent with the objectives of the proposed ESF.
CODE authorized Management to launch a third consultation phase, focusing on implementability of the proposed framework in borrowing countries as well as on a list of outstanding issues. Based on the feedback received during this consultation, the proposed framework will be adjusted as needed and submitted to Executive Directors for approval in 2016.
Management has initiated harmonization of classification for Category A, but action on Category B and C is still pending.
The World Bank Guidelines Environmental for Screening and Classification (dated February 2007) basically reiterates the categorization definitions offered in OP 4.01 and indeed is in need of revision.
7.1b) The World Bank should: Ensure adequate coverage of social effectsintegrating community and gender impacts, labor and working conditions, and health, safety, and security issues not currently covered by its safeguard policiesby consolidating existing social safeguards with other World Bank Group policies on social risks as requirements under one umbrella policy on social sustainability.
7.1c) Consolidate the environmental policies as requirements under one umbrella policy on environmental sustainability.
IEG acknowledges that the 24 month period beginning in July 2010 has not yet ended and we look forward to seeing the final proposal from management.
The Interim Guidance Note: Assessing Social Impacts and Risks Under OP/BP 4.01-Environmental Assessment makes no mention of (a) labor and working conditions; and (b) health and safety and security. QACU indicated that these issues are currently being addressed as follows:
(a) Labor and Working Conditions. Having high level discussions within the Bank to determine how and through which instruments Management considers that labor and working conditions would most appropriately be addressed in the context of IBRD/IDA supported operations. This ongoing discussion includes how these issues should be addressed within the context of the Standard Bidding Document used for Procurement by the Bank. However, several regional safeguard units (e.g. EA, ECA) have already started this process by simply requiring the OSH guidance presented in the WBG EHS Guidelines be incorporated into or cross referenced in the EMPs of Category A and B projects.
(b) Health, Safety and Security. OPCS has already initiated new training on this matter and are covering this issue in our updated guidance materials such as the one discussed immediately above concerning screening and classification
The current EA Policy certainly is an adequate framework to address Health, Safety and Security. However, explicit mention would act to reinforce to both staff and our clients the priority which the Bank places on this issue.
Senior level environmental specialists of the World Bank, IFC and MIGA held meetings to discuss this matter, supported by LEGEN. This has resulted in an alignment between the World Bank and IFC on classification of Category A projects. The Bank also anticipates, as part of the safeguard updating process, adopting the recently introduced (January 1, 2012) subcategorization system for Financial Intermediary operations adopted by IFC.
The World Bank has prepared and disseminated Guidelines for Environmental Screening and Classification which summarizes coverage. This note is currently under a revision process being coordinated by QACU and LEGEN, in order to provide improved guidance on classification of projects in Category B and Category C For purposes of internal coordination the Bank will provide the draft revised guidance note to IFC and MIGA for their review and then have discussions as appropriate. The World Bank, through discussions with other multilateral development banks as part of the updating process for the safeguard policies, is also examining the issue of how to improve the use of Category B as an element of our review of global good practice.
Although the Bank has disagreed with the IEG recommendation on outcomes, the Bank has initiated a process for a comprehensive update and consolidation of the Bank's environmental and social safeguard policies. While initially planned to be undertaken over a 24-month period, following a variety of discussion with a variety of discussions with external and internal parties, Management will present an Approach Paper for discussion by CODE in late September 2012 which will include a proposal for an extending the schedule for completion of this process in 2014.
Progress continues to be made on the pilot program for the use of country systems, with additional projects at the national and subnational level adopting this approach. Management does not plan to have a freestanding process for the revision of OP/BP 4.00. Management has included the revision of OP/BP 4.00 as an integral element of the ongoing process for a comprehensive update and consolidation of the Safeguard Policies. Management anticipates mainstreaming the use of country systems in a modified form as an element of this process.
While the classification of Category A projects has been aligned across the World Bank Group, in respect of the Categories B and C, the effort is ongoing based on a draft guidance note on Guidelines for Environmental Screening and Classification prepared by the Bank. It is noted that projects that are subject to the WB performance Standards (adopted in July 2012) will use IFC's classification system for Financial Intermediary (FI) operations. However, the proposed adoption of IFC's FI sub-categorization system for FI operations is still pending. It is noted that an interim guidance note on Assessing Social Impact and risks under OP/BP4.01 environmental assessment has been prepared and posted on the safeguards policies website in February 2012. Also new training has been initiated in the matter of addressing health; safety and security under the current EA framework, and guidance material have been updated.
On a broader level, IEG notes the progress in the two-year process to review and update the World Bank's environmental and social safeguard policies with the endorsement of CODE. This process was initiated in October 2012 and is expected to continue till end-2014. The time frame appears reasonable given the encouraging progress that has been made in the Phase 1 of the consultation period that ended on April 30, 2013. Phase I included a series of seven expert meetings on each of the emerging issues identified in the Approach Paper. Input has been shared through meetings, expert focus groups, online submissions, and face to face meetings in 30 countries. The Bank has created website that keeps track of developments in this regard.
Management is appropriately pursuing the revision of OP/BP 4.00 as an integral element of the ongoing process of updating and consolidating of the environmental and social safeguard policies. The mainstreaming of country system as an element of the updating process is a welcome prospect that would allow use of the approach at national/sub-national and or sectoral level. Collaboration with ADB to expand the use of country systems and to strengthen country institutional and system to manage environmental and social risks is a notable initiative.
An approach paper on the safeguard review and update was endorsed by the Board in October 2012, and by April 2013 the first phase of the review, including an extensive global consultation, was completed.
Agreed/Partially Completed. Senior level environmental specialists of the World Bank, IFC and MIGA held meetings to discuss this matter, supported by LEGEN. This has resulted in an alignment between the World Bank and IFC on classification of Category A projects.
For those projects that use the World Bank Performance Standards adopted in July 2012, the classification system for Financial Intermediary (FI) operations that was adopted by IFC for use after January 1, 2012 will be used. Further, as part of the safeguard updating process, the Bank will consider the adoption of the IFC's FI subcategorization system for FI operations.
The World Bank has prepared and disseminated Guidelines for Environmental Screening and Classification which summarize coverage. In the framework of the safeguards update and review process, this note is under a revision process being coordinated by QACU and LEGEN, in order to provide improved guidance on classification of projects in Category B and Category C. For purposes of internal coordination, the Bank will provide the draft revised guidance note to IFC and MIGA for their review and then have discussions as appropriate.
The World Bank, through discussions with other multilateral development banks as part of the updating process for the safeguard policies, is also examining the issue of how to improve the use of Category B as an element of our review of global good practice.
The Regions, with the support of OPSOR and LEGEN, are working closely with Regional Safeguards Advisors to improve safeguards related project preparation and especially project implementation by assigning accredited staff to more complex projects that require broader knowledge and more in depth training. The Regions are also actively working to increase the number of local staff that is being accredited based on their experience and also having other staff trained on safeguards so that may be accredited in the future. Accreditation of staff is creating an incentive to be more engaged in safeguards work since it provides both professional recognition for skills that staff have acquired by their work and gives them opportunities to undertake more complex program and project level assignments.
The communities of practice are being used to support the standardization of application of the safeguard policies by staff to improve the quality of our work. They are being used to enhance the self-identify of safeguards staff. The accreditation process also provides professional recognition for staff working on safeguards in a manner similar to of staff accredited to work on procurement. The communities of practice also serve as a dissemination point for lessons learned and innovative approaches to address safeguard issues in operations. These communities of practice are also contributing to the ongoing process for the review and update of the safeguard policies with an emphasis on lessons learned from project preparation and implementation.
Disagreed. Although the Bank has disagreed with the IEG recommendation on outcomes, the Bank has initiated a process for updating and consolidation of the environmental and social safeguard policies, with the endorsement of CODE. This process was initiated in October 2012 and is currently anticipated to be completed in the middle to end of 2014. Management has developed a website for this process, which includes the schedule and information on key events. See www.worldbank.org/safeguardsconsultation
The Bank launched a process of consultations and specialized meetings on the safeguards update at a global scale starting with the Civil Society Forum at the Annual Meetings in Tokyo.
The consultations are planned to be conducted in three phases. Phase 1, which focuses on the Approach Paper, has been initiated, and a program of consultations in over 30 countries is planned to be undertaken by the end of April 2013.
Phase 1 consultations included a series of seven expert meetings on each of the emerging issues identified in the Approach Paper. The panels of experts were chosen by the World Bank. Terms of Reference for their selection are available on the web, and summaries of each of the meetings will be made available on the web.
Per the Management response, QACU, SDV and LEGEN have cooperatively prepared an Interim Guidance Note: Assessing Social Impact and Risks Under OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment, which was posted on the safeguard policies website in February 2012.
Management is reviewing how and through which instruments labor and working conditions would most appropriately be addressed in the context of IBRD/IDA supported operations. This ongoing discussion includes how these issues should be addressed within the context of the Standard Bidding Document used for procurement by the Bank.
The current scope of the Environmental Assessment Policy provides an adequate framework for addressing health, safety and security and in this context we have already initiated new training on this matter and will be covering this issue in our updated guidance materials.
Progress continues to be made on the pilot program for the use of country systems, with additional projects at the national and subnational level adopting this approach. Management does not plan to have a freestanding process for the revision of OP/BP 4.00. Management has included the revision of OP/BP 4.00 as an integral element of the ongoing process for updating and consolidation of the environmental and social safeguard policies. Management anticipates mainstreaming the use of country systems as an element of the updating process, which would allow this approach to be used in situations where equivalence and acceptability is found at the national, subnational and/or sectoral level. It is also anticipated that guidance in the updated policy framework would place a much greater emphasis on supporting the strengthening of country institutions and systems to manage environmental and social risks as an integral element of the use of country systems approach.
The World Bank is working closely with the Asian Development Bank to expand the use of country systems and to strengthen country institutions and systems to manage environmental and social risks. An element of this was World Bank participation in the Strengthening and Use of Country Safeguard Systems Regional Workshop: Sharing Experience Strengthening Partnerships, held in Manila in April 2012. In addition, the World Bank and Asian Development Bank organized a special session on progress in the use of country systems for the annual meeting for the International Association for Impact Assessment that was held in Calgary, Canada in May 2013.
Safeguards are a fundamental part of the Bank's operational work. The broad directions of the Review and Update Processare consistent with IEG's recommendations. During this MAR period, Management has adopted a new architecture and safeguards framework that focuses on environmental and social (ES) outcomes and results; Expanded coverage of social effects integrating community impacts, labor and working conditions, health, safety and security issues; and refined of the categorization system to address the bunching of higher- and lower-risk projects within the current category B by replacing the A, B, C system with a four-level scale of High, Substantial, Moderate, Low Risk (in addition to FI). As Management notes in its response, consultations with the wider community are presently underway.
The review and update of the World Bank's environmental and social safeguard policies was launched in 2012 with the aim of strengthening their effectiveness and enhancing the development outcomes of World Bank investment projects. Following the presentation to CODE of the Approach Paper in October 2012, the World Bank carried out consultations with shareholders, internal stakeholders and a wide range of external participants to seek inputs on opportunities, emerging directions and options to inform the drafting of the Proposed Framework. There were dedicated meetings with Indigenous Peoples and project-affected people as well as expert meetings on "emerging issues" such as climate change, human rights, labor issues, and land tenure. In parallel a global review of good practices and lessons learned was conducted, including a review of the relevant policies of other MDBs.
These consultations and the review culminated in the preparation of the Draft Environmental and Social Framework which was discussed with CODE on July 30, 2014. The Proposed Environmental and Social Framework uses a risk-based approach to environmental and social risks and impacts, with succinct and clear provisions for efficient application. The Proposed Framework provides for proportionate allocation of skills and resources where projects most need them, while the overall approach to managing environmental and social risks and impacts is not diluted.
CODE has authorized Management to launch the second phase of the review and update process, including global multi-stakeholder consultations in the fall of 2014. Based on the feedback received during this period, the Proposed Framework will be adjusted as needed and submitted to Executive Directors for approval in 2015.