| Letter to World Bank about the failure of transparency in its Forest Policy Review process |
|
Simon N. Stuart Phone 41/22/999.02.95 Dear Simon Stuart, We are writing as NGOs (and some as members of the IUCN) to express our dismay about the failure of transparency in the World Bank's process to review its Forest Policy. The IUCN has been contracted by the World Bank to faciltate the consultation process associated with this review. In this process, the agreed role of the IUCN has been 'to support the World Bank in developing and implementing a review process that remains transparent and open to all interested parties.' As you are no doubt aware, since mid-2000, the openness of the process has been in increasing jeopardy and it has recently become clear that the World Bank has reneged on its commitments to openness and transparency. On 6/9/1999, the World Bank posted a note about the consultation process on the web. With reference to the third and final phase of this process, the World Bank web-site explicitly notes:
We have been given to understand that, entirely contrary to this commitment and contrary to assurances given to the Technical Advisory Group at its first meeting, the World Bank does not now plan to release a draft version of its strategy until AFTER it has been presented to Senior Management (OPC). According to information given to the Technical Advisory Group at its second meeting, the schedule for the finalisation of the strategy is now as follows.
· Week of 12 February 2001: strategy to be presented to Senior Management Committee on Operational Policy and Strategy (OPC) · Week of 12 March 2001: strategy to be presented to the Board sub-Committee (Committee on Development Effectiveness - CODE) · Week of 23 April 2001: strategy to be presented to the Board of Executive Directors. The draft strategy is now to be made public only AFTER it's presentation to OPC, by which time significant changes to the text will be very hard to introduce, before it goes to the World Bank's Board of Executive Directors for approval. This failure of transparency in the closing stages of the forest policy review is both unacceptable and inauspicious. It:
· erodes already weak public confidence in the World Bank. · it undermines the support the World Bank needs to actually implement its new forest strategy once it has been adopted. It should be remarked that during the 1990-1991 process by which the previous (ineffective) World Bank Forest Policy was elaborated there was an exactly similar failure of transparency in the closing stages of its elaboration. Indeed, this was pointed out to the World Bank by a government spokesperson at the first meeting of the Technical Advisory Group in June 2000. 'He urged the World Bank to be prepared for that possibility [of internal disagreements within the World Bank about the new policy] and urged it not to lose the transparency to date by closing down the process late in the game.' We feel bound to point out that at the World Conservation Congress held in October 2000, the members of the IUCN passed an (in hindsight very premature) Resolution acknowledging the World Bank 'for the beneficial, open and transparent global public consultation process' on its Forest Policy. To safeguard its own reputation and in order ensure a better outcome from this review process, we hereby call on the IUCN to protest in the strongest possible manner to the World Bank about the way the Bank has broken its promises and demand:
· that the World Bank halts its internal strategy review and approval process to allow time for further external consultation and engagement with civil society · the draft strategy be issued to the public, and specifically be sent to all those - governments, private sector, NGOs and indigenous peoples - who attended the regional consultations · there is a credible and transparent process by which the reactions and suggestions for revisions made by interested parties can be taken into account · only AFTER there has been such a final round of consultations should a revised strategy be submitted to Senior Management and the Board for approval We look forward to learning how you plan to deal with this matter. Yours sincerely, Marcus Colchester
(additional signatories confirmed at 18/1/2001 by email follow): Ricardo Carrere Suzanne Breitkopf Carmel Budiardjo Lars Lovold Laurie Parise Simon Counsell Wolfgang Kuhlmann Joji Carino Vicky Tauli-Corpuz Peter Gerhardt Jaroslava Colajacomo and Francesco Martone Stuart Wilson Bernhard Henselmann Pamela Foster Paul Wolvekamp Regina Frey
Atossa Soltani Binny Buchori Michal Rezek and Dr. Jaromir Blaha Bill Mankin Owen J. Lynch Saskia Ozinga Patricia Fromm Sonia Fraquet Roberto Smeraldi Laszlo Maraz Ulisses Bremer Laura Radiconcini Lider Gongora F. Larry Lohmann, Nick Hildyard and Sarah Sexton Kevin Smith Andrei Laletin Goran Eklof John Kunzli Ed Matthew Alfredo Quarto Alex Wilks Gilbert S. Sepulveda Einar Wilhelmsen and Gjermund Andersen Carolyn Marr Sandra Moniaga Glen Barry Korinna Horta and Stephanie Fried
Juraj Lukac
Maria Hudakova Longgena Ginting Niel Makinuddin Marcial Arias Doug Norlen Pisit Charnsnoh Jim Enright, Geoff Nettleton Hemmo Muntingh Richard Cellarius Kay Treakle Cc: James Wolfensohn, President, World Bank |
