Last week, I posted the first part of an interview with Natalie Bridgeman Fields, the Executive Director of Accountability Counsel, regarding what people can do when the World Bank or other large institutions have supported land grabs. She described two important avenues for recourse within the World Bank Group system: the World Bank Inspection Panel and the Compliance Advisor/Ombudsman (CAO). You can find the first part of the interview here.
Below, Natalie talks about other accountability mechanisms outside of the World Bank Group, and suggests resources for people interested in learning more about the World Bank, land grabs, and accountability mechanisms.
If a large-scale land acquisition — or a different development project that has forced people from their land — has occurred without financial support from the World Bank but with financial support from other sources, such as regional development banks, what accountability mechanisms exist?
Without support from the World Bank Group, but with financing from a regional development bank, other accountability mechanism options to consider are the:
- African Development Bank (AfDB) – Independent Recourse Mechanism
- Asian Development Bank (ADB) – Accountability Mechanism
- Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) – Independent Consultation and Investigation Mechanism
- European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) – Project and Complaint Mechanism
- European Investment Bank (EIB) – Complaints Office
If there is financing from a development finance institution, export credit, or export promotion [agency] of the US, Canada, or Japan, consider the accountability mechanisms of the:
- Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) – Office of Accountability
- Export Development Canada (EDC) – Compliance Officer
- Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) – Examiner for Environmental Guidelines
- Nippon Export and Investment Insurance (NEXI) – Objection Procedures
If a corporation headquartered in an OECD country causes harm that violates the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, consider a complaint to the OECD National Contact Points (NCPs), located in OECD countries and some OECD adhering countries.
The accountability mechanisms listed above [including the World Bank Group’s mechanisms discussed in the first part of the interview] are not all equal. Some are well-functioning, professional mechanisms, and some have operated with a history of bias or unprofessionalism. When considering use of one of these mechanisms, we welcome you to contact Accountability Counsel to discuss the various options.
Are there any resources that you would recommend to people concerned about the World Bank’s role in supporting large-scale land acquisitions?
In August 2010, Accountability Counsel and the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) released a report titled A Call for Reform of World Bank Group Agribusiness Polices and Practice: A Proposal to End Violations of Indigenous and Traditional Peoples’ Rights that addresses the issue of land grabbing supported by the World Bank Group. Accountability Counsel also regularly updates an Accountability Resource Guide with information on each accountability mechanism and how to file complaints. All of this information and more may be found at www.accountabilitycounsel.org.
If you missed the first part of this interview on what affected communities can do when the World Bank finances land grabs, you can find it here.