Shared Approach for Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts for Pacific Island countries

The Shared Approach for the Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts for Pacific Island countries provides guidance on ways to address environmental and social safeguard issues and challenges, particularly those that are unique to the Pacific. It established common methods and procedures to manage environmental and social risks and impacts across an infrastructure project life cycle. This approach intends to make it more efficient for PRIF development partners and Pacific Island countries to collaboratively manage the application of environmental and social safeguards in the Pacific.

The Shared Approach is guided primarily by Tables 1-4. Table 1 describes the key elements of the Shared Approach. Table 2 provides an overview of environmental and social planning and management activities by project phase. Table 3 breaks down tasks relating to environmental and social activities by project phase. Table 4 describes the key roles and responsibilities for environmental and social planning and management across the Shared Approach project phases. A range of Resource Materials are provided including additional information about PRIF development partners safeguard policies and requirements, a draft template that can used as a tool to identify, assess and manage environmental and social risks, guidance on how the Shared Approach links with the South Pacific Regional Environment Programme‘s Environmental Impact Assessment, a glossary of terminologies typically used in environmental and social management or safeguards and a list of abbreviations.

Table 1 - Elements of the Shared Approach

Section 1 - Use of an Integrated Framework for Management of Risks and Impacts
Topics and Issues	Shared Approach	Comments
The Shared Approach What is the Shared Approach for Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts (Shared Approach)?	The Shared Approach: is a robust approach to managing environmental and social risks and impacts of infrastructure development in the PICs; and seeks to improve the efficiency and effectiveness with which the PICs and PRIF development partners undertake measures to address environmental and social risks and impacts. The Shared Approach assists the application of the environmental and social safeguard policies of PRIF development partners, by taking into account the unique circumstances of the PICs. It is expected to help PRIF development partners to implement environmental and social safeguards in the PICs in a shared and consistent way, which will make infrastructure development more efficient, particularly in co-financed activities.	The Shared Approach may be used by the following PRIF development partners: Asian Development Bank (ADB) Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) European Investment Bank (EIB) European Union (EU Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (NZMFAT) United States Department of State (USDoS) World Bank (WB)
Screening and Categorisation Under the Shared Approach, how would projects be screened and categorized for environmental and social impacts and risks?	The Shared Approach provides for each development partner to use its own screening and categorization system. For co-financed or parallel-financed projects, PRIF development partners are encouraged to collaborate to support consistency in the screening and categorization of projects, to the extent possible given their own respective policies and procedures. The screening and categorization is based on review of both potential environmental and social risks and impacts. Categorization is proportional to the significance of potential environmental and social risks and impacts.	In reviewing the social risks and impacts of a project, special attention should be given to the vulnerability of different groups within the beneficiary community or potentially affected people. Screening and assessment processes should identify any groups who may be affected in different ways, or to a significantly different degree, by project construction or operation. This may include ethnic minorities, women, children, the elderly, the disabled, or others who may become more vulnerable to hardship as a result of the project. Development partners may require that special assistance measures be put in place to mitigate any such vulnerabilities.
Special issues in the Pacific Island Countries Why is a “Shared Approach” for the management of environmental and social risks and impacts needed for use by PRIF development partners in the PICs?	The PICs present a unique setting in which PRIF development partners are providing support to a series of geographically remote and isolated countries with complex environmental and social challenges and highly variable and often limited institutional capacity. The dependency of countries on their vulnerable land and marine resources is high. Land is a central aspect of life for many communities and is largely held under customary title. The “land is our life” is a recurrent view expressed across the region. These issues result in an exceptionally complex setting for project design, implementation and operation in which management of environmental and social issues is a major challenge. The experience of PRIF development partners has shown that while their policies are sound in this context, different approaches are needed in terms of methods and procedures to achieve the objectives of safeguard policies in the PICs.	The PRIF development partners have determined that this special set of conditions warrants development and use of an approach to the application of environmental and social safeguards in the PICs that reflects those conditions.
Status of the Shared Approach PRIF development partners plan to use their policies and guidelines in the PICs, complemented by the use of the Shared Approach.	The Shared Approach is intended to support development partners in the application of their own environmental and social policies and requirements. The purpose of the Shared Approach is to provide standardized methods and procedures recommended to be used by PRIF development partners to support the application of safeguard policies in the PIC context. The Shared Approach will remain a living document to be updated through the ESSWG as required when issues emerge. The ESSWG will assess effectiveness of implementation of the Shared Approach 2-3 years after it enters into use, and will thereafter determine whether updates or adjustments are advisable.	PRIF development partners plan to use their policies and guidelines in the PICs, complemented by the use of the Shared Approach.
Scope of Application of the Shared Approach What is the scope of application of the Shared Approach?	The Shared Approach may be implemented for PRIF development partnerfunded infrastructure projects with low to medium impacts and risks in the PICs, including co-financed operations. The Shared Approach can be used for infrastructure projects irrespective of whether they are stand-alone projects or are part of a larger program for one or multiple countries.	Given the complexity of land issues in the PICs, it is proposed that PRIF development partners apply the provisions of the Shared Approach to projects. The Shared Approach includes several land access options that, if implemented, could avoid the “compulsory land acquisition” approach, which is rarely successful in the PIC context. These alternatives also seek to reduce disenfranchisement that inevitably arises from land “alienation.” Community participation should be used to reduce potential delays in obtaining access to land.
Pacific Island Countries To which countries will the Shared Approach be applied by PRIF development partners?	The Shared Approach has been designed by the PRIF for use in the PICs in which PRIF operates. The Shared Approach, which supports application of the PRIF development partners’ safeguard policies, would be used in the following: Cook Islands Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) Fiji Kiribati Nauru Niue Palau Papua New Guinea Republic of Marshall Islands (RMI) Samoa Solomon Islands Tonga Tuvalu Vanuatu
Key features How does the Shared Approach support more effective application of safeguards in the PICs?	The Shared Approach aims to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the application of PRIF development partners’ safeguard policies, and to increase the coherence of the application of safeguards in the PICs. The Shared Approach includes measures to meet the special circumstances of the PICs in terms of: Improving project identification, design and delivery through use of a project cycle approach to environmental and social risk management; Supporting decision making by all parties through highlighting the importance and integral role of community and stakeholder engagement throughout the project cycle; Assessment processes and instruments; Promoting stakeholder/community engagement, with consultation, disclosure and grievance redress; Approaches to accessing land for development projects; and Project implementation, supervision and monitoring.
Convergence – Option to Use SPREP Guidelines How does the Shared Approach acknowledge the convergence of environmental and social safeguard policies in the context of the PICs?	The Shared Approach acknowledges the convergence in approaches used for environmental and social safeguards in the PICs. One example is that the Shared Approach recognizes the major role played by the SPREP with regard to development of guidelines and capacity building in the Pacific, and refers to SPREP publications, in particular the EIA Guidelines, which were published in 2016, as key regional guidance to approaching environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA). To support convergence and improve effectiveness in the application of safeguards in the PICs, it is proposed that PRIF development partners take into account the SPREP guidelines on environmental and social assessment, as described in the SPREP EIA Guidelines, in the context of the Shared Approach. The EIA Guidelines were ratified by SPREP members at the SPREP annual general meeting in September 2016.	The guidelines are guidance notes and tools and do not constitute law, regulation or policy in any PIC. In suggesting use of these guidelines on selected operations, the Shared Approach notes that their use would significantly reduce the challenge for the PICs to meet the requirements of many development partners. It would also allow the PRIF development partners and SPREP to work together in safeguard training and provision of more consistent advisory support.
Country Systems (1) Is the Shared Approach compatible with country systems for environmental and social safeguards?	The Shared Approach builds on CSS and seeks to strengthen capacity in application of CSS. A key focus of the Shared Approach is to support efforts by a diversity of parties to build capacity to address implementation difficulties and weaknesses inherent in the application of the CSS in many PICs.	As a complementary action, PRIF development partners intend to continue to support a collaborative approach to building capacity and institutional strengthening for improved implementation of CSS.
Country Systems (2) Does the Shared Approach provide for the use of country safeguard systems for environmental and social safeguards for development partner funded projects?	The Shared Approach supports use of various aspects of CSS where compatible with PRIF development partner environmental and social policies, and where sufficient implementation capacity is in place. Given the need to strengthen CSS in many PICs, their use at the project level is viewed as a medium-to long-term proposition in most PICs. With regard to formal requests for use of CSS as an alternative to PRIF development partner policies, the Shared Approach recognizes that each development partner considers this through application of relevant policies. Accordingly, any formal use of country systems to address environmental and social issues will be on a case-by-case basis, when informed by studies of the respective systems by the PRIF development partners and other qualified parties indicating that CSS are appropriate, and that implementation capacity is adequate.	Any formal request for use of country systems in the PICs will be informed by the ongoing efforts being undertaken in this area by the ADB, WB and WB/Australia Safeguards Partnership (WBASP). To date, CSS studies (to differing levels) have been prepared for Kiribati, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Vanuatu by ADB and WB. The use of CSS by PRIF development partners will likely require adoption of supplemental or gap-filling measures to make CSS consistent (using equivalence and acceptability measures) with development partner policies, or to strengthen implementation performance.¹ 1. Following formal request, adoption of CSS for any country, sector or agency would be subject to further assessment and approval by the Board and/or management of a particular development partner. Adoption of CSS for any country, sector or agency by any one development partner would not mandate use of CSS for that country, sector or agency by other development partners.
Independent Accountability Mechanisms What is the role of the Independent Accountability Mechanisms of the cooperating development partners when the Shared Approach is used?	The ADB, EIB, JICA and WB all have Independent Accountability Mechanisms. The Shared Approach implements each development partner’s policy requirements; as such, application of the Shared Approach in a project will fall under the scope of the relevant accountability mechanisms in accordance with their mandates.	The Shared Approach does not constitute a new policy or amendment to any existing policy. It is an approach to implementing existing safeguard policy through methods and procedures that recognize unique conditions and challenges in implementing infrastructure projects in the PICs.
Development Partner Cooperation What measures are planned to improve development cooperation in the implementation of the Shared Approach?	The Shared Approach is a key step in development partner cooperation in the PICs, since it provides a collaborative approach to the management of environmental and social risks and impacts. Where possible, the Shared Approach provides for preparation of a single set of safeguard documents, and strengthens development partner collaboration for targeted CSS institutional strengthening and capacity building.	For co-financed and/or parallel-financed projects, a decision will need to be made concerning the willingness of PRIF development partners to undertake joint appraisal and supervision missions that will result in a single report (if feasible) concerning environmental and social aspects of the project.

Table 2 - Overview of environmental and social planning and management activities, by project phase

Phase 1 - Project Identification
General Project Activities	Identification of proponent, allocation of resources, risk allocation, between government departments, development partner(s), contractors.
Environmental and Social Assessment	Initial risk assessment and screening.
Stakeholder Engagement	Identification of key stakeholders and planning of engagement activities.
Grievance Redress	Review of status of and experience with any local GRM.
Disclosure	Review of potential approaches for disclosure of information on a project-specific basis.
Land	Identification of land requirements and siting alternatives. Identification of existing ownership or tenure arrangements for each.
Responsibility	Process driven by counterpart with development partner interaction.

Table 3 - Tasks relating to environmental and social activities, by project phase

Phase 1 - Project Identification
General Project Activities	Identification of proponent, allocation of resources, risk allocation, between government departments, development partner(s), contractors.
Environmental and Social Assessment	Initial risk assessment and screening. Early engagement with regulatory agencies (environment and land – regarding CSS laws/requirements). TOR prepared for project ESIA requirements, as appropriate.
Stakeholder Engagement	Key stakeholder identification (national/subnational/local government, communities, civil society organizations/ non-governmental organizations) and engagement planning.
Grievance Redress	To be coordinated with stakeholder engagement to understand existing/traditional systems (local governance structures, arrangements, etc.).
Indigenous Peoples	Presence of Indigenous Peoples determined. Within urban or rural settings; customary/ communal land issues identified (including dialogue with any agencies). Requirement for broad community support assessed.2 TOR prepared for project due diligence and assessment requirements (if any).
Land	Land tenure constraints identified. Early engagement with regulatory agencies (environment and land). TOR prepared for project land access/acquisition process. TOR prepared for 3rd party verification.
Health and Safety	Initial risk identification. Early engagement with regulatory agencies.

Table 4 - Roles and responsibilities for environmental and social planning and management in the project phases

Phase 1 - Project Identification
General Project Activities	Identification of proponent, allocation of resources, risk allocation, between government departments and PRIF development partner(s).
General Project Activities	Identification of proponent, allocation of resources, risk allocation, between government departments and PRIF development partner(s).
Counterpart - Executing Agency	Commits to project development on behalf of government. Identifies, and makes arrangements with, implementing agency. Commits to broadly scoped project administration and management arrangements.
Counterpart – Implementing Agency (incl. PMU/PIU)	Undertakes screening of project. Provides information for scoping. Develops TOR for ESIA and third-party verification, as appropriate. Initial identification of and dialogue with stakeholders (as basis for SEP preparation).
Development Partner	Undertake field mission and site visit. Develops and endorses project concept. Undertakes initial safeguards screening and categorization of project Provides inputs to/ clearances of TOR for ESIA, land access/acquisition process and third-party verification.
Contractor	NA