Development Channel

In the coming months, the Development Channel will devote a special series to the theme of Global Justice. We will explore the relationship between written law, access to justice, and the realization of freedom and opportunity for all people. The series will highlight diverse perspectives from practitioners and experts around the world, who will shed light on issues that are often invisible to those not directly affected by injustices. The first piece in the series, from Natalie Bridgeman Fields, founder and executive director of Accountability Counsel, stressed the importance of impartial arbitration of disputes between communities and major global development finance institutions like the World Bank, to ensure that the needs of the worst-off are not ignored in development projects. Upcoming pieces will investigate global justice from a variety of perspectives, examining issues as diverse as land grabs, legal empowerment, and how the international community can better support communities in their struggles for dignity, fairness, and sustainable livelihoods. In my series last year on post-2015 development issues, I argued that justice is fundamental to global development, and that it is feasible, politically possible, and imperative to include governance and human rights in the post-2015 global development agenda. I have since argued that to realize those goals we need not only fair rules on paper, but also empowered people and communities with access to advocates who will work to ensure that justice is made real for the worst-off – a “lawyers without borders” approach. Support is growing for such global justice measures. Just this week, a coalition of civil society organizations issued a call to action demanding that the United Nations include justice in the next round of global development goals. What do you think? How does justice relate to development? Are these concepts inextricably intertwined, or are they distinct policy agendas with inevitable trade-offs, as some of my own research suggests? To submit an Op-Ed for consideration for inclusion in our Global Justice series, email me at [email protected]. Looking forward to hearing from you.

Emerging Voices features contributions from scholars and practitioners highlighting new research, thinking, and approaches to development challenges. This article is from Natalie Bridgeman Fields, founder and executive director of Accountability Counsel. Here she discusses the implications of proposed changes to the World Bank Inspection Panel. This is the first piece in an ongoing Development Channel series on global justice and development. The World Bank is in the midst of an accountability crisis: over one billion people who live in poverty may lose their right to an independent hearing if they are harmed by a Bank-funded project. The Bank aims to serve the world’s poorest, but their projects can have negative consequences as well. For the past twenty years, the World Bank Inspection Panel has addressed complaints from people harmed by Bank-funded projects and has served as an independent review to determine if projects comply with the Bank’s own social and environmental safeguards. The Bank claims immunity from lawsuits for harm caused by its official operations due to its status as a specialized agency of the United Nations and because it is comprised of sovereign member governments. Therefore, the Panel helps fill in the Bank’s accountability gap, allowing it to operate as a legitimate, rule-based institution. The Panel is often the only way for people harmed by Bank-funded projects – including those forced off their land due to the construction of large dams, or poisoned by industrial facilities – to have their voices heard. If a Panel investigation finds that the Bank has violated its own policies, Bank management must respond with an action plan to bring the project into compliance. The Panel report and action plan then goes to the Bank’s Board of Directors who decide what to do next. In the past, Panel investigations have led to consulting affected communities about development projects, redesigning projects to avoid harmful impacts, and occasionally cancelling projects entirely. As the founder and executive director of Accountability Counsel, I have worked for many years informing communities around the world that the Panel exists and helping them use it effectively. In its current form, the Panel is comprised of three members who serve five-year terms, as well as a permanent secretariat, led by an executive secretary, which supports the Panel’s functions and preserves institutional memory. The secretariat is responsible for fending off Bank management and Board members’ frequent attempts to undermine the Panel and its independence. But this crucial function is now in danger. On February 13, the Bank’s Board of Directors will consider a proposal from current Panel members to change the rules relating to the secretariat’s independence. The proposal is not a public document and has not been subject to any public consultation or debate. Although former Panel members have fought hard to preserve the Panel’s independence, the current Panel members now want the executive secretary to be a Bank employee who would be allowed to work for the Bank after their limited term ends. In other words, the current Panel members are inviting a revolving door between those supporting investigations and those being investigated. Under the proposed changes, a member of the Bank’s legal department could determine that a project complies with Bank policy, then work as the Panel’s executive secretary and weigh in on whether those same projects are in compliance with Bank policy. In addition, they will be termed out after five to seven years, at which point they may want their job back at the Bank’s legal department—a motivation that could further taint their decision-making. The proposal allows no cooling off periods or post-employment bans to ensure independence, and no tenured positions keep institutional memory. Seven highly respected former members of the Panel recently took the unprecedented step of sending a joint letter accusing the current Panel members of undermining the Panel’s independence and effectiveness. The current Panel members’ response demonstrated a lack of interest in the preservation of the secretariat’s independence. If safeguard rules were valued at the Bank, the proposed changes to the secretariat would be quickly rejected. But the Bank has recently adopted a strategy of “smart risk-taking” and “development effectiveness,” paying little attention to the rules established to protect the environment and people’s rights. The problem starts at the top: as many civil society groups have lamented, Bank President Jim Yong Kim has failed to prioritize accountability and has instead pushed forward projects that have a history of abuses, such as constructing large dams and mining. This latest proposal reveals that the Panel is on board with this strategy, and is more interested in maintaining good relations with Bank officials than ensuring accountability and protecting the world’s poorest citizens from future abuses.

Last week, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) released the eleventh edition of its Education for All Global Monitoring Report, an annual update that reviews the status of access to education around the world and highlights the crucial role that education plays in achieving development goals. This year’s report, titled “Teaching and Learning: Equality Achieved for All,” finds that even after a decade of increased resources and commitments dedicated to achieving universal access to education, many—if not all—of UNESCO’s goals will not be met by 2015. If current trends hold, fewer than half of the 141 countries examined in the report will achieve UNESCO’s goal of 80 percent pre-primary education enrollment rates. As of 2011, there were still 57 million children out of school, with around half of them living in conflict-affected countries and many never expected to re-enroll. In addition, only 20 percent of the world’s low-income countries have achieved gender parity in primary education, and only about 10 percent have equal enrollment for boys and girls in lower secondary school. The stakes are high: education remains one of the most powerful ways to break the poverty cycle. The report estimates that if all students gained basic reading skills, 171 million people could be lifted out of poverty. Education helps inoculate against poverty by providing higher wages and diversifying sources of income. For those already employed, earnings can increase up to 10 percent for each additional year of school. Yet although the number of illiterate adults has fallen 12 percent since 1990, the number has only gone down 1 percent since 2000, leaving 774 million adults without reading and writing skills. In 2012, the World Literacy Foundation estimated that illiteracy was costing the global economy $1.19 trillion. Women comprise two-thirds of the world’s illiterate, which not only limits the status of women and girls, but also hinders economic growth. The benefits of education extend beyond the individuals: families, communities, and future generations benefit as well. In Senegal, for example, UNESCO found that children with educated parents were more likely to find employment and lift themselves out of poverty. And children of educated mothers are more likely to be well nourished, vaccinated, and educated. An educated population is also vital to curbing rising unemployment rates. In its recent Global Employment Trends report, the International Labour Organization (ILO) found that unemployment went up by 5 million people in 2013. Young people were disproportionately affected, with youth unemployment reaching 13.1 percent worldwide and over 50 percent in some countries. Lack of access to education remains a major stumbling block for many young people hoping to enter the labor market. Without proper skills and education, youth are left unemployed or with unreliable jobs in the informal sector. But education, from vocational to university training, can give young people the tools they need to overcome some of these barriers. By prioritizing education at all levels, governments can reduce unemployment rates, inspire entrepreneurship, formalize the job market, and ultimately, build more resilient economies.