Inter-American Development Bank
facebook
twitter
youtube
linkedin
instagram
Abierto al públicoBeyond BordersCaribbean Development TrendsCiudades SosteniblesEnergía para el FuturoEnfoque EducaciónFactor TrabajoGente SaludableGestión fiscalGobernarteIdeas MatterIdeas que CuentanIdeaçãoImpactoIndustrias CreativasLa Maleta AbiertaMoviliblogMás Allá de las FronterasNegocios SosteniblesPrimeros PasosPuntos sobre la iSeguridad CiudadanaSostenibilidadVolvamos a la fuente¿Y si hablamos de igualdad?Home
Citizen Security and Justice Creative Industries Development Effectiveness Early Childhood Development Education Energy Envirnment. Climate Change and Safeguards Fiscal policy and management Gender and Diversity Health Labor and pensions Open Knowledge Public management Science, Technology and Innovation  Trade and Regional Integration Urban Development and Housing Water and Sanitation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Sostenibilidad

Just another web-blogs Sites site

  • HOME
  • CATEGORIES
    • Agriculture and Food Security
    • Climate change
    • Ecosystems and Biodiversity
    • Environmental and Social Safeguards
    • Infrastructure and Sustainable Landscapes
    • Institutionality
    • Responsible Production and Consumption
  • Authors
  • English
    • Español
Photo of man silenced by tape

5 steps to managing risks of retaliation for project-related complaints

June 15, 2022 por Tove Holmström Leave a Comment


Project stakeholder engagement is at the heart of the Bank’s new Environmental and Social Policy Framework (ESPF). But stakeholders’ concerns for their safety, or the safety of their families, can prevent them from speaking out about any grievances they may have. In recognition of this, the ESPF reflects the IDB’s zero tolerance to “retaliation, such as threats, intimidation, harassment, or violence, against those who voice their opinion or opposition to an IDB-financed project.”

According to the Business and Human Rights Resource Center, in 2020 there were 604 reported attacks on human rights defenders around the world, one third of which occurred in Latin America. Reports of retaliation take place against a global backdrop of growing restraints on civic space in which it is becoming increasingly difficult for individuals, organizations, or communities to express critical views without being routinely subject to punishment for doing so. Such punishment—or retaliation—can take many different forms. To illustrate the different forms of retaliation, imagine people in the following situations:

  • An active trade unionist working for a project-implementation agency can be demoted from her leadership position, then harassed by senior management for several months prior to being issued a notice for termination of her employment contract.
  • A local community leader can be portrayed in local media as a troublemaker and “anti-development” for opposing the development of a hydro-electric dam and receive multiple anonymous death threats.
  • A leader of a non-governmental organization working on environmental justice who has openly criticized a project from a development finance institution can be denied necessary government approval to re-register his organization and have his unrelated assets frozen.

Operationalizing a zero-tolerance policy: five steps to managing risks of retaliation

While a zero-tolerance-to-retaliation policy is an important first step, questions arise as to how risks of retaliation should best be identified and managed over the course of a project, and how allegations of retaliation should best be responded to.

To help answer some of these questions, the IDB has released a technical guidance note intended to support both staff of implementing agencies and staff of the IDB in their supervisory role. Put differently, the best protection from retaliation that the IDB, borrowers and executing agencies can provide to individuals and communities is to be aware of potential risks of harm and to exercise good judgement, caution, and sensitivity toward these risks in all their interactions. The technical guidance note seeks to foster this awareness.  

There is no blueprint to managing risks of retaliation and each project will bring its own unique risk picture. There are, however, several baseline measures that can be taken to identify risks and to respond to them without exposing vulnerable individuals to further harm. As the technical guidance note outlines, these include:

1. Taking a difficult conversation early on

An important measure to address risks is an early conversation with project partners, including borrowers and executing agencies but also suppliers, contractors (such as security forces) and consultants that may have a key role to play in project design, implementation, and monitoring.

Communicating the Bank’s zero-tolerance, as expressed in the ESPF, is necessary to be able to set a common understanding of potential risks of retaliation and the need to address them. An early discussion sets the expectation clearly that retaliation will not be tolerated and that incidents will be taken seriously.

2. Seeing what is hard to detect: conducting targeted due diligence

To address risks of retaliation in a given project, they must first be detected and understood. Proactively identifying and evaluating risks of retaliation to project stakeholders should entail a review of available information—both written and through engagement with stakeholders—to determine the overall level of risks. The toolkit proposes a contextual risk assessment approach and outlines some considerations for how to engage with those at risk for the purpose of preparing, implementing, and evaluating stakeholder engagement plans.

3. Agreeing on measures to prevent or mitigate potential risks

Once risks have been identified, an agreement should be made about how the risks will be addressed, by whom and when. The types of measures will invariably need to be adapted to the precise nature of the risks that have been identified. Often, those who find themselves at risk of being attacked will already have their own views about how those attacks could best be averted. Where this is the case, these strategies for protection and defense should be supported. Beyond this, however, the guidance note outlines some of the fundamental options that should inform a good strategy for reducing the likelihood of retaliatory attacks. These include, for example, designing safe-to-use grievance mechanisms, adapting disclosure of information requirements and planning consultation processes in manners that do not expose participants to risks. 

4. Deciding on actions to take if incidents happen before they happen

Where individuals are at risk of retaliation it is important to envision that such risks—no matter the measures that have been put in place to address them—may materialize. This possibility should be foreseen and plans should be made and discussed at the outset with those at risk (or with credible proxies, where direct engagement is not possible or deemed too dangerous for the safety of those at risk). Deciding on actions early on is important because some acts of reprisal, like arbitrary detention, may render the victim impossible to reach.

5. Handling with care: responding to allegations of reprisals

To maximize and properly manage allegations of retaliation against project stakeholders, adopting a policy of “if in doubt, report” is important if individuals are to be able to bring forward any issues of concern to them. A direct corollary of this approach is to take any reports of alleged retaliation seriously, even when or if the outcome is no action. The guidance note highlights some of the considerations that should be borne in mind when responding to retaliation. This includes, for example, determining the speed of action based on the gravity of the incident and not sharing the identity of the victim without their consent (even as a well-intended effort to quickly resolve the situation).

Remember that any retaliation scenario is a sum-of-all-parts. This means that a myriad of actors—local communities, organizations, institutions, and individuals—will knowingly or unknowingly contribute to increasing or reducing the risk of retaliation. For example, organizations working with local communities that share concerns about a project may decide to post photos of community meetings on social media. This may challenge the possibility of those in the image to have their identities protected later down the line.

Many of the measures suggested in this guidance note will typically imply working with local organizations such as community committees, specialized organizations, or national institutions. Building and maintaining these relationships is an important factor in successfully managing risks of retaliation.


To learn more about how to manage the risk of retaliation, download the technical guidance note.


Filed Under: Environmental and Social Safeguards

Tove Holmström

Tove Holmström is a former staff member of the UN Human Rights Office. Working as an independent human rights consultant, her work addresses responsible business conduct with a particular focus on retaliation against stakeholders. In this capacity, she has worked with several development banks and their independent accountability mechanisms, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Most recently, she has been working on the safe engagement with trade unionists in Myanmar, and with defectors of the national armed forces.

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Follow Us

Subscribe

SEARCH

Sustainability

This blog is a space to reflect about the challenges, opportunities and the progress made by Latin American and Caribbean countries on the path towards the region’s sustainable development.

SIMILAR POSTS

  • How to manage human rights risks in development projects
  • Gender contextual risks in development projects
  • 4 facts about IDB’s standard on assessment and management of environmental and social risks and impacts
  • Ten elements to ensure you are integrating social issues in development projects
  • Ten questions to ensure you have meaningful stakeholder consultations for your project

Footer

Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo
facebook
twitter
youtube
youtube
youtube

    Blog posts written by Bank employees:

    Copyright © Inter-American Development Bank ("IDB"). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons IGO 3.0 Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives. (CC-IGO 3.0 BY-NC-ND) license and may be reproduced with attribution to the IDB and for any non-commercial purpose. No derivative work is allowed. Any dispute related to the use of the works of the IDB that cannot be settled amicably shall be submitted to arbitration pursuant to the UNCITRAL rules. The use of the IDB's name for any purpose other than for attribution, and the use of IDB's logo shall be subject to a separate written license agreement between the IDB and the user and is not authorized as part of this CC- IGO license. Note that link provided above includes additional terms and conditions of the license.


    For blogs written by external parties:

    For questions concerning copyright for authors that are not IADB employees please complete the contact form for this blog.

    The opinions expressed in this blog are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IDB, its Board of Directors, or the countries they represent.

    Attribution: in addition to giving attribution to the respective author and copyright owner, as appropriate, we would appreciate if you could include a link that remits back the IDB Blogs website.



    Privacy Policy

    Derechos de autor © 2025 · Magazine Pro en Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

    Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo

    Aviso Legal

    Las opiniones expresadas en estos blogs son las de los autores y no necesariamente reflejan las opiniones del Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo, sus directivas, la Asamblea de Gobernadores o sus países miembros.

    facebook
    twitter
    youtube
    This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser.
    To learn more about cookies, click here
    x
    Manage consent

    Privacy Overview

    This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
    Necessary
    Always Enabled
    Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
    Non-necessary
    Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
    SAVE & ACCEPT