15 April 2010
Writing for the International Budget Partnership newsletter, Amy explains the origins of the revised policy, its strengths and weaknesses, and the role civil society is playing as it is implemented over the first half of 2010.
The World Bank’s New Disclosure of Information Policy: How Can Civil Society Ensure Its Proper Implementation?
Amy Ekdawi, Bank Information Center
On 17 November 2010 the World Bank’s board of directors approved a new disclosure policy titled “Toward Greater Transparency Through Access to Information: The World Bank’s Disclosure Policy,” which becomes effective on 1 July 2010. The revised policy breaks important new ground, not only for the World Bank but for all international financial institutions (IFIs), as it accepts for the first time the principle that all Bank information should be available to the public, unless it falls within the scope of a narrow set of exceptions.
History of Disclosure of Information at the Bank
Timely access to World Bank documents and decision making has been a key concern of civil society organizations (CSOs) for a long time. In the 1980s and 1990s CSOs targeted the World Bank for financing environmentally and socially destructive projects. It was discovered that the Bank withheld vital information from affected communities, denying them the right to participate in decisions regarding the purpose, design, and implementation of projects.
Faced with mounting criticism, in 1985 the Bank adopted its first disclosure rules. In 1991 CSOs pushed the Bank to release environmental assessments prior to the approval of projects, and in 1993 the Bank adopted a formal information disclosure policy, which introduced Project Information Documents (PIDs) as a result of civil society’s pressure and a threat from the U.S. Congress to withhold funds. PIDs were released prior to the approval of a project and expanded the access to project appraisals after approval. In 2001 the Bank revised its disclosure policy for the first time and released documents on structural adjustment loans (though only after loans were approved), completion reports, and the board’s calendar. However, the 2001 policy, which became effective a year later, had many gaps:
- While the policy acknowledged the principle of presumption of disclosure, it was in fact contradictory to this principle.
- The Bank provided a “positive list” of documents that were to be disclosed. For everything not listed there was a general presumption of nondisclosure.
- The old policy contained a list of disclosure exceptions, which were so broadly written that they could justify withholding nearly any type of information.
- There was virtually no implementation information.
- The information request system lacked an appeal mechanism for denied information requests.
The New Policy
On 17 November 2009 the revised policy was approved. This was achieved after a year-long review process and meetings in 33 countries with citizens, government representatives, CSOs, private sector representatives, academia, international organizations, and donor agencies. The new policy adopts five key principles:
- Maximizing access to information, thus adopting a “negative list” instead of a “positive list” as in the old policy
- A clear list of “exceptions” to information disclosure
- Safeguarding the deliberative process
- Clear procedures for disclosing information
- A right to appeal
The policy also recognizes the importance of translating certain information into local languages and promises the examination of the Bank’s existing “translation framework” to “ensure more equitable access by all interested parties to the disclosed documents.”
Gains and Gaps
In addition to adopting a “negative list,” for the first time the new policy expands routine disclosure to include documents created during the implementation phase of the projects and programs. This will allow civil society to play a more active role in ensuring the proper implementation of Bank-funded activities. The policy also increases the access to the Bank’s analytic and advisory activity reports. Furthermore, a system of requests of information will be created to include internal and external mechanisms of appeal.
However, the new policy is far from ideal. One major weakness is the absolute protection of internal information through a “deliberative process”—an exception that can withhold draft information and undermine civil society participation in decision-making processes. Another barrier is the veto power given to governments and third parties, i.e., Bank contractors that allow governments to block the release of almost any information they provide to the Bank.
Implementation of the New Policy
The new policy will become effective on 1 July 2010. To facilitate the transition, the Bank developed a detailed implementation plan upon policy approval, and an Access to Information Working Group (AIWG) was established under the supervision of the external affairs vice presidency of the Bank to implement the policy. The AIWG comprises seven subgroups:
- The policy/handbook subgroup: Will develop the policy statement, internal guidelines, and the staff handbook
- The classification subgroup: Will set criteria for classification and declassification of Bank’s documents
- The IT systems and services subgroup: Will offer technical support
- The communication subgroup: Will ensure that both Bank’s staff and external stakeholders understand the policy and its requirements
- The training subgroup: Will develop the training programs for the proper implementation of the policy
- The translation subgroup: Will examine the existing Bank’s translation framework and determine how to ensure the accessibility of certain Bank’s information to citizens who are not necessarily fluent in the Bank’s working language: English
- The public information subgroup: Will strengthen public information services and access to information on the ground
The Role of Civil Society in the Transition Period
In recognition of civil society as an important stakeholder affected by the information disclosure policy, the Bank invited the Washington, D.C.-based Bank Information Center (BIC) and International Budget Partnership (IBP), as well as the “Centro de Derechos Humanos y Ambiente” (CEDHA) of Argentina to participate in the implementation planning of this policy. The group meets regularly with AIWG’s general secretariat and with individual subgroups as needed.
The World Bank believes that the aforementioned organizations—with their experience on the ground as members of wider networks and through their ongoing outreach to CSOs in many developing countries—can make substantive contributions to the translation, communications, training, and public information subgroups. The three organizations plan to seek input from their partners around the world on various aspects of this policy to better represent a wider cross-section of CSOs from developing countries when providing advice to the Bank’s AIWG.
For more information, contact Amy Ekdawi at .
read more
International Budget Partnership e-newsletter, no. 54, January/February 2010 (IBP website)
Access to Information Policy implementation weekly updates
BIC's World Bank Transparency Review page