Involuntary Resettlement Safeguards Dilution – Evidence

The 30 July 2014 proposed new policy on involuntary resettlement (IR)  dilutes decades of knowledge and experience with a policy, creating a much weaker policy that will increased development-induced impoverishment.  The International Network on Displacement and Resettlement specialists,  especially assisted by talented professionals from Inclusive Development, have compared the proposed new policy to the existing Bank operational policy (OP 4.12 and its Annex A) on key dimensions of the involuntary resettlement process.  This comparison proves the proposed change eviscerates current policy, removing the protections afforded those who just happen to be in the way of Bank financed projects. The result is increased risks of project induced, new poverty – an outcome alien to the Bank’s Articles of Agreement and poverty reduction prime objective.

Theodore E. Downing, President INDR


 

Policy Objectives Removed

1. Where it is not feasible to avoid resettlement, resettlement activities should be conceived and executed as sustainable development programs, providing sufficient investment resources to enable the persons displaced by the project to share in project benefits. (OP, para 2(b))
Sustainable development objective –  Omitted. Allocation of investment resources – Omitted.  Project affected people share in project benefits. Omitted.
The OP 4.12 objective to conceive and execute resettlement activities as a sustainable development program -­‐ central to the Bank’s core mission -­‐ has been omitted and replaced with a focus on compensation for lost assets.  This is a significant regression in the Bank’s approach to resettlement and goes against 30 years of empirical research, much of which has been commissioned and endorsed by the Bank, that shows that compensation without sustained development support cannot prevent impoverishment.

 

Example 2

1. Where it is not feasible to avoid resettlement, resettlement activities should be conceived and executed as sustainable development programs, providing sufficient investment resources to enable the persons displaced by the project to share in project benefits. (OP, para 2(b))
1. Omitted.
The OP 4.12 objective to conceive and execute resettlement activities as a sustainable development program -­‐ central to the Bank’s core mission -­‐ has been omitted and replaced with a focus on compensation for lost assets. This is a significant regression in the Bank’s approach to resettlement and goes against 30 years of empirical research, much of which has been commissioned and endorsed by the Bank, that shows that compensation without sustained development support cannot prevent impoverishment.

Example 3

 

 

Objectives

1. Where it is not feasible to avoid resettlement, resettlement activities should be conceived and…etc.

 Scope

2. This policy applies to all components of the project that result in involuntary resettlement, regardless of the source of financing… etc.

Exploration of viable alternative designs to avoid or minimize displacement

5. The [Bank task team] and borrower staff…(b) explore all viable alternative project designs…

Objectives

1. Omitted.

 Scope

2. Omitted.

Exploration of viable alternative designs to avoid or minimize displacement

5. The Borrower will consider feasible alternative project designs to avoid or minimize land acquisition… etc.

Objectives

1. The OP 4.12 objective to conceive and execute resettlement activities as a sustainable development progam -­ central to the Bank’s core mission -­ has been omitted and replaced with a focus on compensation for lost assets… etc.

 Scope

2. There are many Bank­‐supported projects thatdo not require land acquisition or restrictions on access to land and natural resources… etc.

Exploration of viable alternative designs to avoid or minimize displacement

5. There is no requirement in the draft ESP for the Bank to work with borrowers to explore alternative project designs to avoid or minimize displacement… etc.

Original Matrix (pdf)