Evaluating Environmental and Social Effects of International Projects
-
date post
19-Oct-2014 -
Category
Documents
-
view
426 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Evaluating Environmental and Social Effects of International Projects
1
Evaluating Environmental and Social Effects in
International Finance Corporation projects
10th European Evaluation Society Biennial ConferenceOctober 3 – 5, 2012, Helsinki, Finland
Jouni EerikainenSenior Environmental Specialist
Independent Evaluation Group Private Sector [email protected]
2
Setting the stage- Environmental & Social (E&S) performance
evaluation at IFC E&S sustainability is a strategic pillar at International
Finance Corporation (IFC), EBRD and several other private sector multilateral development banks (MDB)
IFC’s 2006/2012 Performance Standards (PSs) for E&S Sustainability have been adopted by Equator Principle Financial Institutions and EBRD
IEG has evaluated E&S Effects in IFC projects since 1996 and prepared E&S review reports with performance indicators since 2004, and MIGA evaluations since 2010
Annually 88 100 IFC & MIGA evaluations, 5-10 site visits IEG’s evaluation approach follows ISO 14031 standard
“Environmental Performance Evaluation” Introduction of PS framework enables evaluation of E&S
impacts as the change of performance indicators during the project course
Public Sector Evaluation
3
Director-General, Evaluation (DGE)
Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) Private Sector Evaluation (IFC and MIGA)
PresidentWorld Bank
Group
Board
Multilateral Inv. Guarantee
AgencyWorld Bank
Private SectorEvaluation
Strategy,Learning &
communication
Country, Corporate &
Global Evaluation
Independent Evaluation Group
4
Environmental and Social (E&S) risks and opportunities in IFC projects
5
2. IFC’s Investment Outcome Loan Equity
IFC’s self-evaluation system Expanded Project Supervision Report (XPSR)
50% sample of mature projects (5years since approval)
IFC’s self-evaluation system Expanded Project Supervision Report (XPSR)
50% sample of mature projects (5years since approval)
3. IFC’s Work Quality: Screening, appraisal, structuring Supervision Role and contribution
Highly unsuccessful
Unsuccessful Mostly unsuccessful
Mostly successful
Successful Highly successful
1. Development Outcome1. Development Outcome
Satisfactory ExcellentUnsatisfactory UnsatisfactoryPartlyProject’s impacts on:
Business success Economic sustainability
Private sector development
E&S Effects
6
IEG evaluation instructions: rating Environmental and Social Effects (ESE) of real sector projects
RATING
Material compliance with S&E Manag. System(SEMS)
Beyond compliance Role model
Current Environmental & Social (E&S) standards (= IFC Performance Standards)
At-appraisal requirements (ERS, EIAs) based on WBG Safeguard Policies
Excellent (E) YES and YES Excellent Yes
Satisfactory (S) YES or YES
Partly Unsatisfactory(PU)
NO and NObut deficiencies are addressed
Unsatisfactory(U)
NO and NOmitigation is unlikely or non-compliance resulted in environmental damage
No Opinion Possible (NOP)
Relevant information for rating is not obtainable, e.g. missing AMRs – last resort, consider a site visit
Not Applicable (N/A)
Category C projects with no E&S reporting requirements and no adverse impacts through the lifetime; if factual impacts are known then actual rating should be applied (infrequent)
7
Example of E&S Evaluation SummaryA chemical plant in the East Europe and Central Asia region
8
Example of Environmental and Social Effects Evaluation – detailed analysis on air emissions
9
ESE evaluation results on projects committed 1999-2006 and evaluated 2004-2011
Environmental and Social Effects
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
ESE success rate
ESE succ. rate high (CL=95%)
ESE succ. rate low (CL=95%)
`
1996-2011 XPSR average ESE success rate
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
96-98 97-99 98-00 99-01 00-02 01-03 02-04 03-05 04-06 05-07 06-08 07-09 08-10 09-11
ESE success rate
ESE succ. rate high (CL=95%)
ESE succ. rate low (CL=95%)
`
1996-2011 XPSR rolling 3 year average ESE success rate
Success rate % = (S+E) / (U+PU+S+E)
18
Evaluation of E&S Effects of Performance Standards (PS) projects
Environmental and Social Effects
Environmental and Social Performance
• Assessing performance against IFC requirements and PS criteria
• Indicators rated at appraisal and supervision
Environmental and Social Impacts
• Changes in performance• Wider impacts, sector & region
The new evaluation system recognizes the E&S impacts and changes between appraisal and evaluation
PSs implemented since 2006 and evaluated from 2011
19
E&S Effects Evaluation for Performance Standards projects (Case: Petrochemical Plant in Africa)
4Rate E&S Effects and
Impacts based on rating matrix and
demonstration effect
3Rate overall E&S Performance at Appraisal and
Evaluation
2Rate PS 1-8 at Appraisal
and Evaluation
1Rate sub-indicators at
Appraisal and Evaluation
Building a pyramid
from indicators….
20
E&S evaluation of Performance Standards projects
…to measure
E&S footprint
Project: Petrochemical Plant Upgrade ProjectCountry: Africa
ID: 12345
E&S Category: B
E&S Effects: S
E&S Impact: S
E&S Performance at evaluation: S
E&S Performance at appraisal: PU
E&S Manag. Systems PS1: S
Labor and H&S PS2: S
Pollution Prevention PS3: S
Community H&S PS4: S
Land Acq.& Invol. Resettl. PS5: NOP
Biodiversity & Res. mgt. PS6: NA
Indigenous Peoples PS7: NA
Cultural Heritage PS8: NA
ESAP Implementation: S
EHS Guidelines: S
Host Country EHS laws: S
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
21
Challenge to present E&S performance and impact concisely in complex projects
E&S Footprint is presented in a Performance Standards Diamond – key aspects at one glance
The goal is to show how IFC’s intervention has reduced the E&S Footprint area
Project: Vicat-SOCOCIMCountry: Senegal
ID: 25363E&S Category: B
E&S Effects: SE&S Impact: S
E&S Performance at evaluation: SE&S Performance at appraisal: PU
E&S Manag. Systems PS1: SLabor and H&S PS2: S
Pollution Prevention PS3: SCommunity H&S PS4: S
Land Acq.& Invol. Resettl. PS5: NABiodiversity & Res. mgt. PS6: E
Indigenous Peoples PS7: NACultural Heritage PS8: NA
ESAP Implementation: SEHS Guidelines: S
Host Country EHS laws: S
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
NOP
IEG RATINGS
Project: OVERALL SCORE 2011Country: ALL COUNTRIES
Number of projects 10E&S Category: A & B
E&S Effects: SE&S Impact: S
E&S Performance at evaluation: SE&S Performance at appraisal: PU
E&S Manag. Systems PS1: SLabor and H&S PS2: S
Pollution Prevention PS3: SCommunity H&S PS4: S
Land Acq.& Invol. Resettl. PS5: SBiodiversity & Res. mgt. PS6: S
Indigenous Peoples PS7: ECultural Heritage PS8: S
ESAP Implementation: SEHS Guidelines: S
Host Country EHS laws: S
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
Project: Petrochemical Plant Upgrade ProjectCountry: Africa
ID: 12345
E&S Category: B
E&S Effects: S
E&S Impact: S
E&S Performance at evaluation: S
E&S Performance at appraisal: PU
E&S Manag. Systems PS1: S
Labor and H&S PS2: S
Pollution Prevention PS3: S
Community H&S PS4: S
Land Acq.& Invol. Resettl. PS5: NOP
Biodiversity & Res. mgt. PS6: NA
Indigenous Peoples PS7: NA
Cultural Heritage PS8: NA
ESAP Implementation: S
EHS Guidelines: S
Host Country EHS laws: S
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
0
1
2
3
4
PS1
PS2
PS3
PS4
PS5
PS6
PS7
PS8
Appraisal Evaluation
U PU S E NA
NOP
22
Opportunities and challengesThe PS framework provides an opportunity
to evaluate E&S impactsCalculating of ratings is underway and
weighing of indicators will be pilotedChallenges:
lack of baseline and monitoring datacorporate investments to several facilities large number of performance indicatorsevaluation of wider impacts in the region and
industry sectorpresenting evaluation results concisely and
coherently in complex projects Integrating E&S evaluation to IFC’s project cycle
23
Thank you very much on your attention
Jouni [email protected]
Independent Evaluation Group700 19th Street, NW, M9B-919Washington DC, 20431 USA
Tel: +1 202 458 2690http://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/