Conclusiones capítulo 7.

Operation

/General Some stakeholders representatives (NGOs), explained that the consultation of populations was weak or not really a true consultation. They also considered that the communication with the Governement was often weak, as well as engagement with other stakeholders. A suggestion made in this respect was to conduct consultations in two phase: first a consultation during the EIA process (done in the present configuration), the a sharing with the consulted population of the EIA and collecting their reactions on it. (MN 322)

Similar views are also expressed in Counter Balance reports: “There is significant evidence that EIB- backed projects have negative impacts on the ground. Many people living in the project areas feel marginalised from decision-making and are not benefiting from the projects. People living in project areas fell marginalised from decision- making and are not benefiting from EIB operations.”Source: Counter Balance, Challenging the EIB, “Corporate welfare and development deceptions : why the EIB is failing to deliver outside the EU?”, February 2010

As regards the Tenke Fugurume Mining project in DRC, according to the report, the interests of the Government as well as those of local populations have not been major preoccupations during the formulation of the project. In particular, within this area, a large proportion of the population does not know how to read nor write, and the project documents have not been translated in Swahili hereby preventing the population to understand the documents. Moreover, some actions of the project aimed at addressing development aspects (access to water, to electricity, to education, etc.) but their implementation did not take into account the local situation and the real needs of the populations. Source: Counter Balance, Réformer la Banque Européenne d’investissement, “Terrain miné, l’implication de la BEI dans le projet minier de Tenke-Fugurume en RDC », Août 2008 (pages 7 and 17)

Striking during country visits was that many stakeholders explained that their knowledge of the EIB (its activities, the type of support it can offer, its approach within a project) was limited. This concerned national counterparts, notably a Ministry of Industrialisation that had never met the

MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE IF AND EIBOR OPERATIONS IN ACP/OCTS

ADE - EGEVAL II

Final Report September 2010 Annexe 9/Page 26

Ministry of Environment, that considered that contacts with the EIB were minimal (no direct contact), the EIB being working mainly with promotors. It was underlined that contacts with other agencies, such as the WB, were much more frequent. Also contacts with the European Commission were more frequent, but the EIB activities were not discussed during these contacts. Interlocutors also underlined that they wished that engagement would be enhanced (MN 342). . , Within specific operations the presence and participation of the EIB was on the other hand much valued (eg. MN 352).

2003_BOAD PG IV Information available for this operation does not assess development needs as such. Descriptions in some paragraphs provide nevertheless indirect information on this (see project fiche).

No direct reference however to any “development needs analysis” or to the Commission’s CSPs .

2003_Dakar-

Ziguinchor Information available for this operation does not assess the development needs as such. Descriptions in some paragraphs provide nevertheless indirect information on this (see project fiche). No direct reference however to any “development needs analysis” or to the Commission’s CSPs. The value added identification’s analysis carried out by the EIB described the conformity of the project to the EU priority objectives as established in the Cotonou Agreement (pillar 1). Indeed, the project should restore the sea link Dakar-Ziguinchor which is an important element for economic and social recovery plan for the Casamance region. One of objectives is to reintegrate this region within the Senegalese economy.

No further details are provided regarding how this objective will be effectively achieved.

Source : Operation’s « Conseil d’administration. Prêt sur les ressources de la FI. Projet Liaison maritime

Dakar Ziguinchor (Sénégal) », EIB, 2004, p2

2003_MAURITIUS

CONTAINER The project identification document as well as the financial report justify the importance of this project in terms of Senegal’s development needs. For example, this below text is issued from the financial report:

“By its island situation practically all trade of Mauritius goes through Port-Louis, its sole

commercial port. As furthermore 75% of trade is nowadays containerised, the Mauritius Container Terminal is a key component in the economic development of Mauritius. Benefiting from its geographical position Mauritius has furthermore managed to attract transhipment traffic; as transhipment implies the use of large container ships, freight charges are minimized and transport duration for imports and exports reduced. Finally through its new hub function the Mauritius Container Terminal contributes to regional integration thereby bringing economic benefits not only to Mauritius but also to its neighbouring countries. The project thus fully meets the objectives of the Cotonou Agreement to foster development in the ACP partner countries of the EU”

« Mauritius: Mauritius Container Terminal II Project. Extension of the Mauritius Container Terminal. Cotonou Agreement-Loan from the Bank’s own resources. Ops B Financial report», EIB, 2004, p 8

2003_GILGEL

GIBE As the projects documents do not present a development needs analysis, it is difficult to answer this question. However the EIB justifies this project as follows:

“Expansion of hydro generation capacity will help to meet demand growth and improve the quality and reliability of supply. EEPCO is pursuing ambitious targets to expand the coverage of electricity supply, starting from the current low levels of service provided to less than 15% of the population, and to improve the efficiency of the system by connecting towns that are currently run as isolated systems. The economic viability of the project, taking account of alternative demand scenarios and investment options, will be verified during appraisal.”

According to a report of the Delegation of the EC to Ethiopia in August 2007, “the Project was defined without a comprehensive sector support strategy. Possible negative consequences are: limited coordination and policy influence for the long-term sector development in synergy with other interconnected sectors; limited scope for supporting best practices with regard to (socio) environmental impacts of large infrastructure projects;

absence of an accompanying programme for social development and capacity building; de-link with grant programmes and projects financed by the Italian Development Cooperation in Ethiopia”

“The Gilgel Gibe Affair. An analysis of the Gilgel Gibe hydroelectric projects in Ethiopia.”, Counter Balance, 2008, p16

2004-WAGP Yes. The developmental potential of the project is highlighted as well as its benefits in terms of cost of power generation, cleaner generation process (based on gas instead of oil).

Sources Factsheet A and B, Appraisal Report.

2004_LUMWANA The project is a mining project and important for the development of productive sector activities in Zambia but it is also likely to develop a region that has suffered from a lack of regional

infrastructure because it is far from the capital town and from the Copperbelt. The government is assisting with infrastructure and the present project is an additional step in the development of a new copper province in North West Zambia to even economic disparities between regions. The mine development will include a village with clinic, schooling and other facilities. Sources:

EIB Fact Sheet A: proposal to appraise new operation. Luxembourg 08/07/2005. OPS B/ACPIF- 3SouthAfrica,0.Ind/2004-0146/BrandSchmitzWaltraud

EIB Note to Ops B/ACP-IF-3 Opinion for Appraisal, Luxembourg 27/5/2005. PJ/I&S/2005- 598/GCE/MJ/aa

Apart from income and profits for the promoter, le project will bring the following benefits to the country:

 Valorisation of a so far unused competitive indigenous natural resource,

 The project has a significant development impact for the North-Western Province of Zambia,

 Export revenues and income from taxation and royalties for Zambia,

 Expected creation of employment, transfer of management, mining and copper processing skills to the local population, and the related investments in health and education will give a boost to the human capital in the region.

Source EIB Lumwana Copper Project, Appraisal report, Luxembourg 30/6/2006, PJ/I&S/2006- 675/GCE/VMJ/aa

2001_MOMA_

Titanium The Moma project will stimulate the regional economy and infrastructure in Northern Mozambique, a particularly poor area, which currently lacks foreign investment. Preliminary calculations by the promoter indicate that the net present value generated from the mining operations is estimated to be much greater than the existing land use. In terms of employment, while small losses will be suffered by sacrificing the current subsistence agriculture/hunting activities, the net estimated job creation should be in excess of 400 permanent jobs as well as several temporary jobs during construction. According to promoter’s documents, the project has strong support from national and local authorities as well as acceptance from the local population although with some reservations regarding relocation of people and loss of natural resources. The appraisal is expected to shed more light on the costs and benefits for the region coming from the project.

Source: EIB Note to OP3. Opinion for Appraisal Authorisation, Luxembourg, 15th _{May 2001,}

PJ/I&S/2001-0556/GCE/IK/sp

Despite the significant mineral resources of Mozambique, mining contributed less than 1% to the country’s GDP in 2000. The project appears consistent with the government policy of Mozambique in the mining sector to attract international investors in the country.

MID-TERM EVALUATION OF THE IF AND EIBOR OPERATIONS IN ACP/OCTS

ADE - EGEVAL II

Final Report September 2010 Annexe 9/Page 28

Ops B/ACP-3/A° 2001-0242

2005_Pacific

Islands Information available for this operation does not assess development needs as such. Nevertheless, the operation’s 2005 fact sheet A mentions the following as “economic benefits” for the “rationale for financing”:

« Diversification: provision in an efficient manner of global loans and possibly guarantees to help support the growth of smaller projects in the Pacific region and a broadening of local financial markets.

Employment: A higher rate of employment in the SME sector.

National Income: Higher tax incomes primarily due to an increase of SME businesses and a lower rate of unemployment. »

The Fact Sheet A further mentions as EIB value-added:

“The Facility would (i) build new capacity in the finance sector (ii) provide a cost-effective window for EIB financing operations in the region (iii) potentially assist in the development of new financial products under Cotonou.”

Source: “Fact Sheet A – Proposal to appraise new operations” (of the operation), EIB, 29/09/2005 (p2)

The report to the Board for the operation’s contract in Palau specifies that the project is in accordance with Cotonou, in particular the focus on private sector development. It also provides contextual information with regard to limits of financial market liquidity in the country (partly provided above under I-2.1.5). “The second Pacific Islands Financing Facility is in accordance with the objectives set out for the Investment Facility in the Cotonou Agreement, in particular the focus on private sector development. The development of SMEs and micro-sized initiatives is one of the keys to sustained employment growth in the Pacific region and is crucial to both poverty reduction and the building of stable democratic societies, and enjoys full support of the relevant Pacific Governments.

Financial market liquidity in the Pacific Islands, where it exists, is primarily of a short term nature and the lack of longer term financing precludes many projects from obtaining suitable funding from local sources. In the same way as the first PIFF operation, PIFF II focuses on SMEs and micro-sized businesses and the key value-added component is to encourage the development of a large number of micro-, small and medium-sized initiatives in the private sector throughout the Pacific region. It increases employment across a wide range of sectors. It also addresses micro-finance needs by giving the least privileged strata of the population access to appropriate credit facilities.”

This same information is provided in the 2009 PPR in the “Development Impact” area.

Source: “Board of Directors, Global authorisation from IF resources” (for the operation), EIB, 21/11/2006 (p3)

PIFF I - Samoa The 2009 PPR for the contract with the Development Bank of Samoa under the first PIFF