March 09, 2005
The consultation period for the Inter-American Development Bank’s new environmental policy has ended and pressure groups have expressed concern that the proposals lack impact.
The opportunity for business groups and non-profit organisations to comment on the Inter-American Development Bank’s (IDB) revised environmental policy ended on 8 March.
The IDB’s draft Environment and Safeguard Compliance Policy aims to integrate social and environmental issues into the bank’s loan approval process. This is the first revision of the policy for 26 years.
Designed to reflect best practice among other multilateral lending organisations, the draft follows the World Bank’s guidelines in classifying projects according to their potential environmental impacts and risks.
The draft policy also details the specific processes required for environmental impact assessments. These include timely and adequate stakeholder consultation, a solid project justification, the examination of alternatives, and plans to mitigate and manage a project’s potential impacts.
The policy’s goal that projects should be supported only if they are “environmentally viable” promises to have “extensive and profound consequences”, according to the IDB.
It will mean, for example, that the bank will not back projects that threaten to convert or degrade cultural sites, areas of critical conservation or regions of ecological importance.
‘Little improvement’
But environmental groups have expressed concerns that the draft policy shows little improvement.
“The new draft is still completely out of step with international standards,” Friends of the Earth says. The organisation also states that the draft uses ambiguous language, lacks binding implementation guidelines and fails to clarify how the policy will be implemented or
funded.
Other pressure groups have entered the debate. Among the more vocal have been Environmental Defense, Sobrevivencia (FOE Paraguay) and the Asia-Pacific Environmental Exchange.
Concerns raised include the failure of IDB’s draft to introduce evaluation mechanisms, such as strategic environmental assessments, earlier in the planning process.
Another criticism is that the IDB has failed to follow the example of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) in specifying the types of projects that require full environmental assessments. The EBRD’s list includes large dams, pipelines and projects involving population resettlement.
The IDB has faced criticism recently for financing a number of environmentally controversial projects, such as the Camisea gas pipeline in Peru and the Yacyret* hydroelectric dam between Paraguay and Argentina.
A final draft policy document will be completed by next month. The IDB board will then review the draft policy in May, prior to its endorsement in June.
The policy will enter into effect six months after board approval and will be subject to review as part of an independent midterm assessment after three years.
