Law Commons^™

Unacceptable Means: The Inspection Panel Actions On World Bank Forcible Resettlement, Lori Udall

Perspectives

This essay reviews the World Bank’s Inspection Panel’s work on cases involving involuntary resettlement. Since its Inception, the Panel has received 89 requests involving resettlement (over half of all cases) and has investigated 32. It traces Panel cases, lessons learned, and advisory reports on resettlement and livelihood restoration. Despite the growing evidence through the years of resettlement failures, the World Bank continues to violate its own safeguard policies and repeat the same omissions and mistakes in projects. The essay concludes with recommendations for empowering the Inspection Panel and for the Bank to move towards bottom-up community development that better addresses …

The River Of Accountability Mechanisms: Then And Now, Suresh Nanwani

Perspectives

In 1993, the river of international accountability mechanisms (IAMs) commenced from its source – the World Bank Inspection Panel (The Panel). In its journey the river was fed by the tributaries of similar accountability mechanisms from other development institutions, including four regional development banks – the Inter-American Development Bank in 1994, the Asian Development Bank in 1995, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development in 2003, and the African Development Bank in 2006. It also welcomed other entities – bilateral institutions like Japan Bank for International Cooperation (2003) and Proparco (2018), United Nations Development Program (2014) and other organizations like …

Thirty Years Of Accountability In International Development: Insights From The General Counsel Of The World Bank Group, Christopher H. Stephens

Perspectives

The creation of the World Bank’s Inspection Panel in 1993 was a groundbreaking moment in international development. The first accountability mechanism of its kind, it established a precedent for accountability in development that has been followed by multiple development banks and international financial institutions over the last decades. Today, the credibility of international financial institutions rests significantly on the mechanisms that they put in place to check their own behavior and the avenues they offer for affected communities and individuals to raise questions of harm related to the projects financed by these institutions. This essay is a reflection on the …

Reflections On The Role Of The Panel, Charles Di Leva

Perspectives

Over the past thirty years, the World Bank and the Inspection Panel have had a supportive relationship regarding the principle of accountability, particularly as applied to the field of development finance operations and the role and responsibility of the Bank as a multilateral public sector financial institution. This relationship has been apparent in at least three key aspects: i) following the Bank’s lead, many development institutions around the globe have taken steps to improve their own accountability and developed independent accountability mechanisms (IAMs) modeled on the Inspection Panel; ii) the Bank and other development institutions have been supporting the development …

An Increased Normalization Of Iams Faces Ground Realities: Lack Of Transparency Impedes Access To Iams, Hamid Sharif

Perspectives

The creation of the Inspection Panel at the World Bank has led to the emergence of a norm that international financial institutions (IFIs) must hold themselves accountable to project-affected people through independent accountability mechanisms (IAMs). AIIB as a 21^st century bank reflects this normalization of IAMs. As a new MDB, AIIB’s charter mandates creation of an oversight body that includes the independent accountability mechanism or the Project-affected People’s mechanism (PPM). The PPM is aligned with many features of IFI’s IAMs while incorporating some innovations.

The central question asked by civil society and board members across IFIs is why there …

Between Disruption And Legitimation Of Development: A Critical Perspective On The Inspection Panel And A Call For More Radical Thinking Within The Accountability Community, Dustin Schäfer

Perspectives

The essay explores the Inspection Panel’s (the Panel) conflicting role of providing accountability for negatively affected people while facing political limitations. The Panel has proven its potential to disrupt harmful development practices. However, by reproducing “dev-speak” it also continuously contributes to legitimizing the same assumptions of “how to do development”, and thus to the continuation of harmful development practices. This ambivalent effect is inherent to the Panel because of its politically inhibited and depoliticized (i.e. technocratic) environment. To overcome this long-lasting and structural condition will require critical examination of the concept of development and the role it plays in …

Rethinking 'What Counts' As Accountability, Jonathan Fox

Perspectives

The current accountability impasse suggests it may be time to rethink core concepts, as well as the field’s underlying theories of change. The idea of accountability is malleable, ambiguous — and contested. This fuzziness poses challenges for both theory and practice – how do we know what strategies bolster accountability – or whether accountability produces its expected effects? This think piece recognizes the challenge of defining ‘what counts’ as accountability, unpacks a longstanding theory of change - that sunshine is the best disinfectant - and considers some information-based reform initiatives to identify missing links in the causal chain between transparency …

Ending Violence In Development Finance Actions To Affirmatively Prevent And Stop Reprisals Against Rights Defenders, Gregory Berry

Perspectives

This Essay makes a case for stronger enforcement and implementation of zero-tolerance policies on reprisals within Development Finance Institutions. It argues that for DFIs to inculcate any hopeful vision of a just and inclusive transition to a sustainable future, they must begin by affirmatively cutting at the roots of reprisals. The essay particularly emphasizes two essential changes. First, Independent Accountability and Audit Mechanisms must be empowered to protect the safety of defenders by self-initiating investigations where there are credible concerns of reprisals, and by accepting anonymously submitted complaints. Second, DFIs must evolve to grow teeth for enforcing measures against retaliatory …

The Promise Of Collaborative Problem Solving In Enhancing Iam Effectiveness, Gina Barbieri

Perspectives

This essay analyses the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving through mediation within accountability mechanisms, and considers ways in which western mediation principles should be enhanced to ensure fair outcomes given the power imbalance at play in development disputes. It also considers whether there is any scope to use problem solving principles to address questions of compliance, arguing for consideration of a hybrid approach to bolster tools available to IAMs, and so strengthen outcomes for communities.

Thirty Years Of Community-Centered Accountability In International Development Key Developments At The World Bank Inspection Panel, Dilek Barlas

Perspectives

Through the lens of important cases, this essay reflects on major developments that occurred at the Panel during the tenure of the author as the Executive Secretary of the World Bank Inspection Panel and shows how the Panel has evolved to improve accessibility, has influenced overall development policies, and has become a catalyst for institutional change. The essay observes that the Panel’s success has largely been due to its structural and operational independence, reporting as it does directly to the Bank’s Board of Executive Directors. However, there are challenges facing the Panel on certain issues, including most importantly its independence, …

Three Decades Of Seeking Elusive Remedies, Richard E. Bissell

Perspectives

Remedy is a topic to be approached with some trepidation in the area of accountability. Throughout three decades of proliferating International Accountability Mechanisms ( IAMs), remedy has been the issue least addressed by leadership. Most management and board members find it threatening, wherever a remedial action falls on the spectrum, from an apology for error to financial compensation. The pursuit of remedy builds on the demonstrated existence of harm, which is embarrassing at the least, and brings a focus on consequences and actionable steps for those people whose lives have been damaged as well as for environmental violations. This short …