90390 The World Bank’s Approach to Grievance Redress in Projects The World Bank’s Approach to Grievance Redress in Projects Background and Purpose may arise during project preparation and implementation; (ii) identification of the client’s existing capacity for griev- The World Bank is committed to enhancing opportunities ance redress; and (iii) an action plan that identifies priority for grievance redress, collaborative problem solving, and areas for strengthening grievance capacity, or if necessary, alternative dispute resolution on the projects it supports. establishing new mechanisms at the project level. Where Effectively addressing grievances from people impacted applicable, dedicated resources should be allocated for real- by World Bank projects is a core component of managing istion of the action plan. operational risk. Grievance redress mechanisms (GRMs) can be an effective tool for early identification, assessment, and Step 1: Assessment of Risks and Potential resolution of complaints on projects. Understanding when Grievances and Disputes and how a GRM may improve project outcomes can help The project team works with the client to conduct a rapid both project teams and beneficiaries improve results. review of contentious issues, stakeholders, and institutional capacity, strongly relying on existing information from the The business case for such an approach is strong—many client, civil society and other non-state institutions. The major infrastructure projects around the world are stalled ESIA, ORAF, and/or RAP or IPP should provide the basis due to disputes over land, water, or labor issues. The costs for much of this work. of ignoring such disputes—or responding too late—are high. A core characteristic of an effective grievance mechanism The work will start by understanding the issues that are—or is the ability to identify minor community incidents before are likely to be—at the heart of disputes related to the project, they escalate into unmanageable disputes. This is especially such as clarity over land rights, benefit distribution, existing important for development projects, where support from ethnic tension, or labor issues. impacted communities is critical to success. The review will map who the key stakeholders to these The World Bank Executive Board and senior management issues are and what the nature of the debate is (informed, are supporting more effective approaches to problem solving polarised, etc). Attention will be paid to the local dispute to help strengthen the Bank’s performance and development resolution culture and, particularly, to the capacity and outcomes. OPCS has taken the lead in coordinating this track-record of stakeholders to settle disputes through medi- strengthened corporate approach1 focusing on a preventive ation or constructive negotiation. approach to identify, track and resolve grievances early; and offering lower-cost, rapid citizen redress at the project and Step 2: Capacity Assessment country level through mediation, facilitation or other problem solving processes where it is most needed. The Bank is not The review will also cover the availability, credibility and alone in this: across public and private sectors, in developed capabilities of local and national institutions to address and emerging economies, organizations have increasingly the issues related to the project or program. For each of institutionalized complaints handling and dispute resolution the institutions that are expected to deal with these issues, processes to better manage feedback and operational risks. there will be a credibility assessment, based on the follow- ing criteria:2 This note presents the World Bank’s recommended approach to strengthening grievance capacity in Bank-sup- ported projects. Approach to Grievance Redress 1   Through the Dispute Resolution and Prevention team (DRP). 2   In reference to the report issued in 2008 by John Ruggie, the UN The approach proposes three interlinked steps: (i) a risk-based Special Representative of the Secretary General on Human Rights and assessment of potential grievances, disputes or conflicts that Transnational Corporations and other business enterprises. 2 The World Bank’s Approach to Grievance Redress in Projects Risk Analysis Table Institutional Capacity Local Community National Human National Boards or Councils National Courts Rights Commission Ombudsman Property / Tenure disputes High / Medium High /Low High /High Benefit Sharing Etc. Participation in Decision-making • Legitimacy: is its governance structure widely perceived Step 3: Action Plan as sufficiently independent from the parties to a par- ticular grievance? Action plans will necessarily be project specific, but should • Accessibility: does it provide sufficient assistance to focus on tangible steps that can be taken during prepara- those who face barriers such as language, literacy, tion and implementation to strengthen grievance capacity awareness, cost, or fear of reprisal? more widely. A key emphasis is to explore opportunities • Predictability: does it offer a clear procedure with time and synergies for supporting improved sectoral or national frames for each stage and clarity on the types of results capacity for addressing disputes that might arise from proj- it can (and cannot) deliver? ect-specific impacts. • Fairness: are its procedures widely perceived as fair, especially in terms of access to information and oppor- tunities for meaningful participation in the final decision? • Rights compatibility: are its outcomes consistent with Access point for impacted/concerned people applicable national and international standards? Does • Well advertised and easily accessible it restrict access to other redress mechanisms? • Roadmap for timeline and milestones • Transparency: are its procedures and outcomes transpar- ent enough to meet the public interest concerns at stake? • Capability: does it have the necessary technical, human and financial resources to deal with the issues at stake? Grievance Log • Back-office is critical Categorising both risks of disputes and institutional capacity to address those disputes is central to this approach. Where capacity of national institutions are low and the stakes are high, the risk of grievances going unaddressed will be sig- nificant. The risk analysis table is a helpful guide: Assess, Acknowledge, & Respond • Determine who is responsible Issues and stakeholder reviews will be mostly desk-based (client, World Bank, other?) Appeal? and will initially and primarily rely on the information con- • Low risk or high risk? • Exclude/refer? tained in the ESIA and other project documents. Review of institutional capacity will likely require both desk-work and in-country interviews with key stakeholders. A two-page “GRM Evaluation” that can be used to guide a discussion on the effectiveness of existing grievance capacity in a coun- Resolve and Follow-up try is also available. The focus should remain on whether Implement agreed plan for resolution existing systems are credible to the users, i.e. beneficiaries Monitor and follow-up and local citizens. 3 The World Bank’s Approach to Grievance Redress in Projects In practical terms, there are a small number of components for informal or traditional systems, such as village councils or an effective institutional approach to grievance management: elders. This will often require training local people and putting in place a formal link between the traditional systems and Additional detail on each component is provided below. a Bank-designed GRM (this could take the form of a verbal agreement or a written MoU). Access Point / Complaint Uptake t t DRP and SDV staff can provide examples of GRM databases i i Have access points as close to the users as possible. and off-the-shelf technology to build a database p p At a minimum, the database should track and report publicly An easily accessible and well publicised focal point or on the following metrics: user-facing ‘help desk’ is the first step. This can be within the relevant agency or government department, but must • # complaints received be in a location that is seen as credible and accessible. • # complaints resolved Uptake channels should include some or all of the following: • # complaints that have gone to mediation phone hotline, email, mail, SMS, webpage, or face-to-face. The uptake channels should be publicized and advertised GRM data should be included in the Bank’s own supervision via local media, the implementing agency and—where systems, including via ISRs and ICRs. The project team should t relevant—contractors. discuss with the client the need to fully share the data with i Staff members who receive complaints verbally should put the Bank to allow the Bank to provide support where needed and help the client respond quickly and effectively. p them in writing for them to be considered. Recognising that many complaints may be resolved ‘on the spot’ and infor- The database should also show the issues raised and location mally by project staff, there are opportunities to encourage of complaints circle around. these informal resolutions to be logged here to (i) encourage responsiveness; and (ii) ensure that repeated or low-level Assessment, Acknowledgment, and Response grievances are being noted in the system. The GRM should have the ability to handle anonymous complaints. Eligibility should be a procedural step to ensure that the issue being raised is relevant to the project. It is often better Typically, the user should be provided with a receipt and to ensure a relatively low barrier to entry with quick turn- ‘roadmap’ telling him/her how the complaint process works around rather than to prevent users having their issues and when to expect further information. considered. Grievance Log Complaints that cannot be resolved on the spot should be directed to the grievance focal point who will have a set It is important that all complaints are logged in writing number of days to assess the issue and provide a written and maintained in a database—either a simple Excel file response to the complainant, acknowledging receipt and or a publicly accessible web site (with appropriate steps detailing the next steps it will take (one week or less is rec- taken to preserve anonymity). Complaints received should ommended). The determination of whether the issue can be assigned a number that will help the complainant track be resolved on the spot or needs to be referred elsewhere progress via the online system or database. Complainants requires some judgment on the part of the client—and, in should be handed a receipt and a flyer that describes the some instances, the TTL. GRM procedures and timeline (staff should be trained to read this orally for illiterate complainants). Where possible, Grievances should be categorised according to the type of the grievance log should capture complaints being made via issue raised and the effect on the environment/claimant if 4 The World Bank’s Approach to Grievance Redress in Projects t On the spot resolution is encouraged but make sure all inci- project or open conflict between stakeholders. These i dents are recorded in a central database. issues are unlikely to be resolved via a GRM and should p be handled at the highest appropriate level within either the client country or the Bank. Higher risk issues will the impacts raised in the complaint were to occur. Based on require greater independence to handle, whereas low- this categorisation, the complaint can be prioritised based er-level feedback can and should be handled “in-house,” on risk and assigned for appropriate follow up. For example, i.e. by the client. claims relating to land may be referred to an existing land claims court if this has been identified as a credible institu- • What is the risk-level of this complaint? Is it low risk, tion for resolving these disputes. The process of assigning medium risk, or high risk? Ideally, the person or office cases is generally more successful when it is done with the handling the complaints will have been involved with agreement of the user. (or aware of) the risk assessment process that may have been completed prior to putting in place the GRM (i.e. The assessment of next steps should consider: Steps 1&2 above). Some training will be required to ensure staff implementing the GRM are aware of what • Who is responsible for responding to this grievance? would constitute a higher-risk issue for the project and Is it the client, the World Bank, or someone else? It which entity should handle such a complaint. is anticipated that the majority of issues raised will be informational in nature or feedback that requires small • Is the complaint already being addressed elsewhere? course corrections; these should generally be handled If an issue is already being handled, for example by a by the client. Issues having to do with governance local court or mediation body, or within the World Bank issues—at the client or by World Bank staff—should be (for example by INT or the Inspection Panel), then the addressed at a higher level, either an appeals or super- issue should most likely be excluded from the grievance visory body within the client or senior management redress process in order to avoid duplication and con- within the Bank. The ‘tip of the iceberg’ complaints fusion on the part of the complainant. will likely be those reflecting outright opposition to a The client should have the primary role in resolving com- t plaints. If possible, this responsibility should be written into i appropriate project management manuals and procedures. p Once the above issues have been considered, the complainant Needs should be offered option(s) for resolution of their issue. Conflict independence The option offered is likely to fall into one of the following three categories: a. The complaint falls under the mandate of (contractor/ Governance client) and resolution can be offered immediately complaints according to the request made by the complainant. The response will describe how and when resolution will be provided by (contractor/client) and the name Can be and contact information of the staff member respon- in-house Basic information requests, sible for it. feedback b. The complaint falls under the mandate of (contractor/ client) but various options for resolution can be con- sidered and/or extraordinary resources are required. 5 The World Bank’s Approach to Grievance Redress in Projects The response will invite the complainant to a meeting mediation service and a minute will be signed signaling to discuss these options. the complaint has been resolved. c. The complaint does not fall or partially falls under the • If the complainant does not accept these options or mandate of (contractor/client). The response will indicate if he/she does but an agreement is not reached, the that the complaint has been referred to the appropriate case will be closed. The complainant may seek redress body (eg. Complaints related to resettlement will be through courts or other mechanisms available at the forwarded to the Resettlement Committee), which will country level. continue communications with the complainant. Resolve and Follow-Up Appeals Where there is an agreement between the complainant and the Where an agreement has not been reached, the com- client or contractor on how the complaint will be resolved, a plainant should be offered an appeals process. One approach minute will be drafted and signed by both parties. After due is to refer appeals to the national courts or other suitable implementation of it, a new minute will be signed stating process. In some countries, the courts may not be seen as that the complaint has been resolved. effective, in which case the Bank and client should discuss offices/individuals within the implementing agency that All supporting documents of meetings needed to achieve have a degree of independence from the project and are resolution should be part of the file related to the complaint. viewed as credible spaces to resolve higher-level disputes. This should include meetings that have been escalated to an In some instances, it is helpful to convene a senior and inde- appeals level or are handled by a third party. pendent panel of individuals to seek appropriate resolution of the case, with representation from both government and The client should provide regular (monthly or quarterly) civil society. This panel may also play the role of providing reports to the public that track the # complaints received, strategic oversight and assurance of the mechanism through resolved, not resolved, and referred to a third party. The World reviewing monitoring and tracking data. Bank project team should receive either the raw grievance data or the monthly reports, in order to support the client At this stage it may be helpful to offer third party fact-find- in early identification of developing risks. The GRM data ing, facilitation or mediation. OPCS3 maintains a roster of should feed into ISRs and ICRs to demonstrate responsive- independent professionals located in the regions who are ness and early resolution of issues (and help teams identify experienced with World Bank projects and can provide outstanding complaints in need of attention). independent support on a contract basis. Costs will be paid by the project. • If the complainant accepts the options, and an agreement 3   Contact disputeresolution@worldbank.org or go to Furl “disputeres- is reached, implementation will be monitored by the olution” for further information. 6