Stocktaking on the Philippines Country Safeguards System

1

• Stocktaking on the Philippines Country
  Safeguards System
• May 19, 2005

2
Background

• High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (Rome,
  February 2003)
• Marrakech Roundtable on Managing for Development
  Results (February 2004)
• 2nd High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (Paris,
  March 2, 2005)
• 3rd High Level Forum (2006)

3
Rome Declaration

• Participants committed to improve the management
  and effectiveness of aid by harmonizing donor
  policies, procedures and practices around
  strengthened partner country systems, and
  aligning assistance around partner strategies and
  priorities

4
Paris Declaration

• Scale up for more effective aid
• Partner County Ownership
• Harmonization
• Alignment
• Results
• Mutual Accountability

5
Objectives

• Increased development effectiveness
• Improving policies, procedures, practices for all
  expenditures
• Greater country ownership
• Strengthened implementation performance
• Increased efficiency in use of resources
• Strengthened country capacity
• Create performance based incentives

6
Three Areas of Practice

• Financial Management
• Procurement
• Environmental and Social Safeguards

7
External Issues - Perceptions

• Backdoor Approach to Overall Safeguard Policy
  Change
• Dilution of Bank Safeguard Standards
• Way to Increase Lending Volume at Expense of
  Quality
• Who Decides Equivalence
• Delegation of Clearances to Countries
• Evasion of Inspection Panel
• Risk to Borrower and Environment
•  

8
Cooperation on Safeguards

• Harmonization is not standardization
• Recognizes that MFIs have different mandates and
  policies
• Focus of process is on improved practices
• Significant opportunities exist for improvements
  in process and greater efficiency

9
Internal Issues - Concerns

•  Parallel IFC Safeguard Update Consultation
  Process
• Consistent Messages from Bank Within and
  Outside
• Avoiding Wishful Thinking The Safeguard
  Policies Will Go Away
• Focus on Pilot Program As A Closely Supervised
  Learning Process

10
Way Forward

• Taking the High Road by Explaining Advantages
  of Country Systems Approach for Some Countries
  and How It Can Support More Sustainable Outcomes
• Explaining the Learning Character of the Pilot
  Approach Note That the Bank System of
  Safeguards Will Remain in Place
• Clarifying that Supervision will be Strengthened
  During the Pilots

11
Meaning of Use of Country Systems

• Use of implementing institutions and applicable
  laws, regulations, rules and procedures in the
  country for the activity being supported by the
  Bank
• Could refer to central government, sub-national
  governments or specific agencies/entities or
  utilities (for example infrastructure
• Use where, in the Banks judgment, the relevant
  country system is equivalent to the Bank policy
  framework applicable to that operation.

12
Use of Country Systems

• OP/BP 4.00 (Piloting the Use of Borrower Systems
  to Address Environmental and Social Safeguard
  Issues in Bank-supported Projects approved by the
  Board on February 24, 2005
• Effective date of policy March 18, 2005
• Monitoring and evaluation plan to Board before
  first project can be presented

13
Why Pilot the Further Use of Country Systems

• Need for directed learning process to answer
  practical questions
• Can we achieve the development objectives of
  borrowers and World Bank policy through the use
  of country systems?
• What gap-filling is needed?
• What are key factors to monitor during
  supervision?
• How best can the use of country systems be
  facilitated/mainstreamed?
• What are the implications for the way we do
  business?
• What are the cost implications for the use of
  this approach?

14
Global Consultation Process

• (govts, devt partners, civil society, private
  sector, Bank staff in HQ and field offices)
• AFR Regional -Tanzania
• EAP -China, Philippines, Vietnam
• ECA Regional -Croatia
• LAC -Brazil, Jamaica
• MNA Regional -Tunisia
• SAS -India

15
Issues Raised in Initial Global Consultations

• Questioning the rationale, motivation of Bank,
  capacity building
• Use of PIUs and PMUs
• Assessing equivalence Paper/practice
• Upholding consultation and transparency/disclosure

16
Issues Raised in Initial Global Consultations

• Addressing cost of diagnostic work and
  supervision
• Possible impact on project timetables
• Providing opportunities for third party
  monitoring
• Ensuring accountability-inspection panel

17
Issues Raised in Initial Global Consultations

• Planning beyond the pilot period
• Reduced Bank involvement in country dialogue

18
Banks Safeguard Program

• Two year pilot program
• 14 pilot countries
• Selected countries, programs, projects
• Reporting to the Board
• Monitoring and evaluation
• Focus on partnership
• Future decisions on next steps

19
PHILIPPINES, Not a Formal Safeguard Pilot but

• the Bank-CMU agreed to do a stocktaking on the
  Country Systems for Environmental and Social
  Safeguards Policies aimed at identifying areas
  needing assistance for strengthening local
  capacity, doing diagnostic work and continued
  policy dialogue (to be included in the next
  Country Assistance Strategy)

20
Objectives of the Stocktaking

• Conduct a variance analysis between the
  Philippines policy framework and key principles
  of international good practice in EA, involuntary
  resettlement and indigenous people
• Do a rapid assessment of implementation capacity
  and track record at the national and subnational
  levels
• Identify social, political, institutional and
  other impediments to improving local policy
  implementation and capacity
• Develop a methodology, action plan and TOR for
  conducting more targeted assessments and
  institutional development/capacity building

21
Activities Included in the Stocktaking

• Desk Review
• Rapid Assessment of Capacity and Implementation
• Stakeholders review-input/feedback sessions
  (Safeguards forum, EA/SA practitioners forum, LGU
  discussions)

22
Specific Outputs of the Stocktaking

• Summary report with key findings including a
  matrix summarizing key areas of policy,
  institutional, implementation capacity gaps and
  impediments
• An immediate-short term (1-2 years) and
  medium-long term (gt2yrs) action plan for
  analytical work, technical assistance and
  capacity building on safeguards discussed with
  key stakeholders and govt counterparts
• TOR/concept note for a targeted further analysis

23
Time Frame

• Initial Desk Review (March 16-April 12)
• Orientation workshop (April 13)
• Rapid Assessment/focused group discussions (April
  18 to May 22)
• Draft RA report submission (May 23)
• Feedback Forum (May 21 to June 23)
• Final Report (June 30)

24
Team

• Tito S. Nicolas (Team Leader, EASSD)
• Joe Tuyor (Environment Specialist, EASEN)
• Maya Villaluz (Environment Specialist, EASEN)
• Soc Patindol (Environment Consultant)
• Eng Raralio (Social Safeguard Consultant)
• Asger Cristensen (Peer Reviewer, Social
  Safeguards, EASSD)
• Jitu Shah (Peer Reviewer, Environment, EASEN)