At the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Board of Governors of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) held in Tashkent, Uzbekistan in May 2010, the President announced a joint Board and Management review of the Accountability Mechanism. This paper gives the summary of the review in which the main objective was to examine the scope for improvements in the Accountability Mechanism. The Accountability Mechanism provides a forum where people adversely affected by ADB-assisted projects can voice and seek solutions to their problems and report alleged noncompliance of ADB's operational policies and procedures. It consists of two separate but complementary functions: consultation phase and compliance review phase.

This report reviews the implementation of ADB's Accountability Mechanism Policy during the period 2016–2018. ADB's 2012 Accountability Mechanism Policy mandates a triennial analysis of lessons learned, with a focus on the management of complaints elevated to this "last resort" mechanism. This report attempts to put into perspective the number, nature, and management of complaints from project-affected people as dealt with by project-level grievance redress mechanisms (GRMs) and by operational departments. It finds that most complaints are effectively addressed by GRMs and that the number of projects with complaints reaching the Accountability Mechanism is a small fraction of ADB's active portfolio. The recommendations are aimed at improving the future implementation of the policy.

Multilateral development banks and other development agencies have adopted environmental and social safeguard policies setting due diligence standards for the provision of project finance. Such policies are evolving in terms of the activities covered and in their normative requirements. Recent iterations incorporate human rights requirements, recognising the imperative of adopting human rights-based approaches to development. Each institution has also established independent accountability mechanisms (IAM), variously functioning to ensure compliance with the applicable safeguards, to advise management regarding the application of the obligations involved, and to facilitate communication with affected communities and individuals with a view to resolving project-related disputes. IAMs are central to the implementation, interpretation, and ongoing elaboration of safeguard policies, and thus to the environmental and social good governance so essential for sustainable development. This edited volume presents a series of in-depth examinations by leading experts from banking institutions, academia and civil society, of key aspects of the rapidly evolving practice of IAMs, and of the implications of such practice for environmental and social governance.

After a full-scale review of the Accountability Mechanism that was concluded in February 2012, the new Accountability Mechanism of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) became effective on 24 May 2012. It has resulted in clearer and closer collaboration between the functions of problem solving—handled by the Office of the Special Project Facilitator (OSPF)—and those of compliance review by the Compliance Review Panel. The policy now clearly defines the responsibilities of OSPF and those of the Office of the Compliance Review Panel ( OCRP) as well as the oversight function of the Board on compliance review. The newly created position of the complaint receiving officer is a single entry point for complaints and directs them to OSPF, OCRP, or other offices in ADB. These changes make the Mechanism more credible, efficient, and effective in addressing the concerns of people affected by ADB projects.

Engaging with one of the most consequential issues of our time, this book offers a comprehensive analysis of responsibility for environmental damage under international law. In doing so, it considers the responsibility, liability and accountability of state and non-state actors for harm caused to the environment and non-compliance with environmental norms across a wide range of multilateral regulatory frameworks.

Through detailed comparative case studies of civil society engagement with two major regional international organizations in Southeast Asia this book demonstrates the potentials and limitations of civil society actors as democratizing agents in governance beyond the nation-state. Drawing on previous research on civil society, social movements, transnational activism, and democratization, Uhlin develops an analytical framework focusing on a) how national and international political opportunities shape—and are shaped by—civil society advocacy; b) how civil society activists frequently combine inside and outside strategies when targeting international organizations; and c) how civil society advocacy can have a liberalizing impact on the targeted international organizations. Drawing on rich empirical data, including more than 100 qualitative interviews with civil society activists and representatives of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the study demonstrates how civil society actors have contributed to pushing ADB—and to a much lesser extent ASEAN—in a political liberal direction, improving transparency, strengthening accountability, and introducing mechanisms protecting people from the abuse of power. With its innovative analytical framework, broad scope covering civil society activism across Southeast Asia, and in-depth analysis of civil society attempts to influence ADB and ASEAN the book makes important contributions to research on civil society activism in Southeast Asia as well as the more general field of civil society and governance beyond the nation-state.