Select Committee on Trade and Industry Written Evidence


ANNEX II

INTERNATIONAL BEST PRACTICE

This section aims to provide an overview of best practice—first amongst ECAs and MDBs, and then some examples from the private sector. It should be noted that it has not been possible to describe the details of these policies. In some cases the policies and procedures listed may only apply to projects of a minimum duration or above a certain value. Additionally, it focuses on the general policy of the institution without attempting to list specific exceptions which may exist. The table in Appendix 5 provides further details of the ECAs and MDBs investigated.

BEST PRACTICE AMONGST ECAS AND MDBS

1.  Environmental screening and review procedures

  It is common practice amongst all institutions analysed to screen applications for environmental impacts, assigning each a category[121]—A, B or C (a few institutions also use an additional category). This is often based on a questionnaire.

    —  JBIC also confirms environmental considerations identified through its questionnaire via sector specific checklists[122] for A and B projects.

    —  EKN's questionnaire also requests details of potential positive impacts (rather than only negative impacts), backing documentation or an explanation of answers, and provides definitions and guidance notes.[123]

    —  For many of the institutions, an environmental impact assessment (EIA) is required for category A projects, while some less detailed form of environmental audit is required for category B projects.

2.  Environmental standards

  Most ECAs follow a "benchmarking approach" regarding environmental standards. This means that they do not have one clear environmental standard, but choose examples of international environmental good practice as reference points or benchmarks for a particular project. In general, the standard chosen for a particular project is not publicly disclosed.

    —  The EDC follows the benchmarking approach, but for category A projects it also discloses the standard chosen as the basis for the environmental review.

    —  The Ex-Im Bank does not use a benchmarking approach. It has a set of numerical guidelines related to air emissions, water quality and noise impacts, as well as qualitative guidelines for other environmental and social factors, such as pulp and paper, mining, oil and gas, power plants, forest operations, hydro power and water resource management.

    —  The World Bank/IFC also have their own environmental standards, numerical and qualitative, based on the Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook[124]. They also have specific policies on natural habitats, forestry, dams and international waterways.

3.  Monitoring

  More than for other areas, there is no standard approach amongst the organisations towards monitoring of environmental impacts of projects, or of the impacts and performance of the organisation as a whole. There is also generally less information available regarding monitoring procedures.

    —  JBIC undertakes monitoring for category A and B projects based on information supplied by the borrower—and in some cases conducts its own investigations. It is particularly notable for having sector-specific monitoring forms, which are publicly available[125].

    —  Since 1999, Ex-Im has tracked annual global greenhouse emissions from power projects it supports

    —  EKN has started evaluating the climate impact of its overall guarantee portfolio and strategies, in order to reduce impacts.

    —  The IFC has developed a framework to measure and monitor internally the positive impact, or "value added" of projects—the Private Investments' Contribution to Sustainable Development[126]. This is based on eight indicators, of which two look specifically at environmental performance, while others consider issues like accountability and transparency or management and capacity, as well as social issues. The framework measures positive impacts beyond the minimum environmental and social safeguards (which all projects must comply with).

4.  Environmental expertise

  Many of the organisations did not have publicly available information detailing the number of environmental staff, or environmental training which non-environmental staff undergo. This is an area where best practice generally lies with the private sector (see Appendix 4), as well as the World Bank and IFC.

    —  In addition to having an environment and engineering division, the Ex-Im Bank has a dedicated staff member for its "environmental exports program".

    —  In addition to internal expertise and training, the IFC requires its financial sector clients to attend a one-week training seminar in environmental management. A survey of IFC clients revealed that the IFC's assistance on environmental matters was amongst the top three most valued services.[127]

5.  Transparency and disclosure

  Key issues in transparency and disclosure focus on questions of what information is disclosed, at what point in the project cycle and for which projects.

    —  The World Bank, IFC and the EBRD all have a policy of presumption in favour of disclosure where disclosure would not materially harm the business and competitive interests of clients.

    —  While all organisations commit to keeping commercially sensitive information confidential, the EDC is unique in defining at length what constitutes information related to "commercial competitiveness[128]".

    —  IFC and EBRD require project sponsors to make environmental information public for category A and B projects—unlike many of the other organisations that have a policy of disclosing project information, but only with the permission of the project sponsor.

    —  Several of the organisations have a policy to disclose project information a number of days (between 30 and 120) before a decision on providing financial support for the project is reached (ex ante)—particularly for category A and sometimes B projects. The exact information disclosed varies.

    —  Several organisations also publish ex post transaction details on their websites and/or annual reports, although again the information disclosed varies. The IFC, for example, posts on its website information on the project sponsor and major shareholders, location and description of site, description of company and purpose of project, environmental category and a description of key issues and mitigation measures, and monitoring and compliance plans. It also publishes environmental documentation, including EIAs and environmental audits.

6.  Exclusions

    —  The MDBs have the most extensive exclusion lists, which include wildlife regulated under CITES; pesticides, herbicides, pharmaceuticals and other hazardous substances subject to international phase-outs or bans; drift net fishing in marine environment using nets in excess of 2.5 km in length; and in the case of the IFC/World Bank, logging in primary tropical moist forests. As an example, see the EBRD exclusion list in Appendix 8.

    —  The ECAs also have some exclusions. These include:

    EFIC: prohibited materials and substances based on Australian customs.

    Ex-Im: banned and restricted pesticides and chemicals, and commercial logging in primary tropical forests.

    —  EKN is reviewing its involvement in the Indonesian pulp industry.

7.  Positive incentives for environmental exports

    —  Some ECAs actively encourage exporters of environmental technologies to approach them, particularly through considering or offering extended terms of finance (within OECD restrictions[129]). These include EFIC, JBIC and Ex-Im.

    —  The EDC is conducting a survey of the Canadian environment industry to better understand its profile and needs.

    —  The IFC has an environmental projects unit to identify and develop environmental projects, especially in partnership with grant-making institutions.

    —  The World Bank has established the prototype carbon fund to develop the market for project-based greenhouse gas emissions reductions within the framework of the Kyoto Protocol.

8.  Appeal procedures

  Few of the ECAs have specific appeal procedures.

    —  Both the IFC and the EDC in Canada have a compliance officer, which is independent of management and has an ombudsman-like role for dispute resolution. The compliance officer acts as an intermediary, encouraging dialogue between the EDC and a complainant, including recommending methods for dispute resolution.



121   Category A means the project has potential significant environmental impacts which may affect an area beyond the project site, including projects in sensitive areas or sectors. Category B means potential impacts are less than for category A-usually site-specific and reversible. Category C means the project is likely to have minimal or no impacts. Back

122   JBIC has checklists for thermal power, hydro power, steel mills, copper smelting works, mining, petroleum/natural gas development, petrochemical, forestry, paper and pulp, road construction, airports, ports and harbours, general industry and infrastructure. See www.jbic.go.jp/english/environ/guide/finance/check/index.php Back

123   See www.ekn.se/includes/MIlijobilagaENG.pdf Back

124   See http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/essd/essd.nsf/Docs/PPAH Back

125   See www.jbic.go.jp/english/environ/guide/finance/monitor/index.php Back

126   Based on International Finance Corporation internal document, Private Investments' Contribution to Sustainable Development: Recognizing strong environmental, social or corporate governance contributions to development impact in projects, which was the basis of indicators developed by SustainAbility, IFC and Ethos for the report, Developing Value: The business case for sustainability in emerging markets, London, 2002. Back

127   John Ganzi, Frances Seymour and Sandy Buffett, Leverage for the Environment: A guide to the private financial services industry, World Resources Institute, Washington DC, 1998. Back

128   See www.edc.ca/corpinfo/csr/disclosure/treatment-e.htm Back

129   To avoid competition between ECAs based on the financial terms they offer, and to ensure they are not providing subsidies but are consistent with market terms, the OECD has restrictions on the terms of financial support which ECAs can offer. However, as discussed on page 6, extended payment periods are currently offered for some sectors, including power plants, nuclear plants and civil aircraft. Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 4 February 2005