Accountability Mechanism Policy 2012

ADB's 2012 Accountability Mechanism Policy mandates a triennial analysis of lessons learned, with a focus on the management of complaints elevated to this last resort mechanism. This report attempts to put into perspective the number, nature, and management of complaints from project-affected people as dealt with by project-level grievance redress mechanisms (GRMs) and by operational departments. It finds that most complaints are effectively addressed by GRMs and that the number of projects with complaints reaching the Accountability Mechanism is a small fraction of ADB's active portfolio. The recommendations are aimed at improving the future implementation of the policy.

After a full-scale review of the Accountability Mechanism that was concluded in February 2012, the new Accountability Mechanism of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) became effective on 24 May 2012. It has resulted in clearer and closer collaboration between the functions of problem solving—handled by the Office of the Special Project Facilitator (OSPF)—and those of compliance review by the Compliance Review Panel. The policy now clearly defines the responsibilities of OSPF and those of the Office of the Compliance Review Panel ( OCRP) as well as the oversight function of the Board on compliance review. The newly created position of the complaint receiving officer is a single entry point for complaints and directs them to OSPF, OCRP, or other offices in ADB. These changes make the Mechanism more credible, efficient, and effective in addressing the concerns of people affected by ADB projects.

At the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Board of Governors of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) held in Tashkent, Uzbekistan in May 2010, the President announced a joint Board and Management review of the Accountability Mechanism. This paper gives the summary of the review in which the main objective was to examine the scope for improvements in the Accountability Mechanism. The Accountability Mechanism provides a forum where people adversely affected by ADB-assisted projects can voice and seek solutions to their problems and report alleged noncompliance of ADB's operational policies and procedures. It consists of two separate but complementary functions: consultation phase and compliance review phase.

This year's Annual Report of the Accountability Mechanism (AM) has the theme "Strengthening Partnerships" with good reason: Cooperation is the heart and soul of the mechanism. Without close collaboration among the AM, governments, aff ected people, nongovernment organizations, and civil society organizations, the AM cannot work. Collaboration between the AM and Asian Development Bank (ADB) staff is essential. We are constantly learning from stakeholders in ADB projects and from project staff , and we also learn from our interactions in the field during outreach missions. In this publication, the O ffice of the Special Project Facilitator, the O ffice of the Compliance Review Panel, and the Compliance Review Panel itself present their activities in 2014 and some of the challenges for 2015.

The main purpose of the Accountability Mechanism of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) is to provide people adversely impacted by ADB-assisted projects with a forum for airing grievances that may have inadvertently arisen as a result of project operations, and seeking appropriate redress. However, few people understand that the mechanism benefits ADB as much as it does project beneficiaries. By ultimately improving project quality, operation of the Accountability Mechanism prevents numerous adverse impacts from occurring altogether. This report summarizes Accountability Mechanism operations during 2013 within the context of specific ADB-assisted projects. This approach provides readers unfamiliar with the mechanism with an easily understandable introduction to its operations. More importantly, the report’s focus on real-world examples allows project beneficiaries and their representatives, nongovernment organizations, government agencies, and even ADB staff members to understand how they may best benefit from its use.

This book presents a series of in-depth examinations, by leading experts from banking institutions, academia and civil society, of key aspects of the rapidly evolving practice of IAMs, and of the implications of such practice for environmental and social governance.

Engaging with one of the most consequential issues of our time, this book offers a comprehensive analysis of responsibility for environmental damage under international law. In doing so, it considers the responsibility, liability and accountability of state and non-state actors for harm caused to the environment and non-compliance with environmental norms across a wide range of multilateral regulatory frameworks.