2003年-世界发展银行全球_Impact_of_the_World_Bank_Groups_Social_and_Environmental_Policies_on_Extractive_Companies_and_Financial_Institutions___Phase_One_94页_837kb

Summary of the World Bank Group's Social and Environmental Policies Impact on Extractive Companies and Financial Institutions

Introduction

This report, commissioned by the World Bank Group's (WBG) Extractive Industry Review (EIR) Secretariat, was conducted by Associates for Global Change (AGC), an independent consulting firm based in Washington, D.C. The research aimed to assess the impact of WBG guidelines on the environmental and social policies of extractive companies and their financial backers, particularly smaller firms not directly funded by the WBG. The study focused on companies and institutions active in the WBG's four regions of interest: Africa, Asia-Pacific, East and Central Europe, and Latin America and the Caribbean.

Executive Summary

The WBG has become a de facto benchmark for environmental and social standards in the extractive industry, even for companies not directly receiving its funding. Key findings include:

• Impact on Small E&P Companies: The influence of WBG guidelines appears indirect and minimal for smaller exploration and production (E&P) firms. However, there is a "trickle down" effect from larger firms that are aware of WBG principles.
• Financial Institutions: Private financial partners and export credit agencies (ECAs) show a more direct and significant impact from WBG guidelines. Many use them as a baseline reference and some have developed their own best practices.
• Proactivity Categories: Companies and financial institutions generally fall into three categories based on their level of proactivity:
  1. Meet local (often minimal) standards.
  2. Follow commonly accepted guidelines like WBG and IFC standards.
  3. Develop their own "best practice" standards.
• Regional and Country Focus: Companies tend to implement more advanced policies in their home countries than in emerging markets.
• Social vs. Environmental Focus: Environmental issues are better defined and measurable, while social impacts are more qualitative and challenging to quantify.
• Need for Better Tools: Financial institutions seek more tools to assess and mitigate social risks in their lending and investment criteria.

Key Findings

Environmental and Social Policies

• Public Information: Most companies provide some level of public information on their environmental and social policies, but the detail is often insufficient for meaningful comparison with WBG guidelines.
• Policy Types:
  • Policies: Many companies have formal policies such as Environment Policy, Safety Policy, or Social Policy, often presented as bullet points or short statements.
  • Statements of Principle: These resemble formal policies and reflect a commitment to environmental and social responsibility.
  • Activities: Descriptions of current or planned environmental and social programs, including community engagement, environmental impact assessments (EIAs), and safety initiatives.

Standards of Practice

• Companies and financial institutions reference various standards, including:
  • Internal Standards: Policies developed by the organization.
  • External Standards: Guidelines from the WBG, governments, or industry groups.
  • Examples: Some companies adhere to North American environmental standards or Australian industry best practices, while others follow WBG guidelines.

Other Indicators

• The research also looked for other indicators of environmental and social management, such as operational structures and compliance mechanisms.

Issues for Further Study

The report highlights several areas for further research, including:

• Drivers for Policy Adoption: Understanding the internal and external factors that influence extractive companies and financial institutions to adopt environmental and social policies.
• Impact of the Equator Principles: Analyzing the effect of the Equator Principles on other financial institutions and extractive companies.
• Implementation Challenges: Identifying the difficulties in translating environmental and social goals into actual practices.
• WBG's Role: Determining how the WBG can better support smaller and upstream firms, through outreach, incentives, and capacity-building for emerging market regulators.

Proposed Phase Two

A follow-up Phase Two will involve interviews with key executives from selected extractive companies and financial partners to gather more in-depth insights and to explore specific recommendations for improving the WBG's role in promoting environmental and social responsibility in the extractive sector.

Methodology Overview

• Target Organizations: 65 organizations were selected across four sectors: mining (20), oil and gas (20), export credit agencies (10), and private financial partners (15).
• Selection Criteria:
  • Focus on companies with no or indirect relationship with the WBG.
  • Preference for upstream activities.
  • Geographic diversity across WBG regions.
  • Inclusion of both traditional and emerging market players.
• Data Collection: Information was gathered from publicly available sources, including company websites, annual reports, and investor presentations.
• Evaluation Framework: Data was categorized into four main groups:
  1. Level of public information provided.
  2. Public commitments to environmental and social principles.
  3. Standards of practice.
  4. Other indicators of environmental and social management.

Relevance to the EIR

The findings aim to support the EIR in its discussions with stakeholders and in formulating recommendations to the WBG on its role in the extractive industry. The research also identifies areas where the WBG could provide greater support, particularly for smaller and upstream firms, and suggests ways to improve its outreach and influence in these sectors.