occasional-paper-271-aaf7f1545ec915ed.pdf

This research paper explores the collaboration between Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) and national entities in South Africa and Ethiopia regarding environmental and social (E&S) safeguards for infrastructure. It analyzes the transition toward 'country ownership' of these safeguards, highlighting the tension between MDB standards and national sovereignty. Using the Medupi Power Station in South Africa and infrastructure projects in Ethiopia as case studies, the paper identifies gaps in capacity building and accountability. It recommends the creation of country-specific E&S plans, enhanced regional capacity building based on the Asian Development Bank model, and a stronger role for national Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) to ensure sustainable infrastructure development.

• Multilateral development banks (MDBs) have historically been slow to relinquish control over development issues to borrowing countries, which has led to highly conditional loans and pushed some countries toward less stringent emerging finance sources, such as private finance and Chinese bilateral loans.
• The World Bank's 2016 Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) represents a shift toward greater flexibility and country ownership, though it has faced criticism from civil society organizations (CSOs) who fear it dilutes standards by allowing the use of weaker national policies.
• In South Africa, the Medupi Power Station served as a 'use of country systems' (UCS) pilot project. While South Africa is noted for having one of the most advanced legal environmental regimes globally, the pilot showed that MDB bureaucracy did not decrease as expected and capacity building remained too project-specific to support overall national E&S capacity.
• The Medupi project illustrates a successful compromise where the World Bank required the retrofitting of flue-gas desulphurisation (FGD) technology to reduce sulphur emissions—a condition not required by South African law at the time—while allowing flexibility on the timing of installation due to national water constraints.
• In Ethiopia, the government follows a 'developmental state' model that prioritizes economic growth and mega-infrastructure projects (road, rail, and electricity), which can lead to the marginalization of environmental and social safeguards and a minimal role for civil society.
• There is a fundamental tension between the technocratic view of MDBs, who see E&S safeguards as a matter of harmonizing standards, and the view of borrowing countries, who may perceive these requirements as Western formulations that impinge on national sovereignty.
• The authors recommend that MDBs move beyond project-specific requirements to create country-specific 'E&S safeguards plans' within general sector strategies. This would provide clarity, recognize unique national contexts, and offer a guide for accountability mechanisms.
• Capacity building is identified as a critical failure in current UCS pilots. The authors suggest adopting the Asian Development Bank's (ADB) regional capacity-building model, which uses workshops and handbooks to foster mutual learning and best practices.
• National Development Finance Institutions (DFIs) are positioned as key agents for driving national buy-in for E&S standards because they are more locally embedded and trusted than MDBs, although most African DFIs currently lack the necessary resources and capacity.
• The role of civil society is essential for accountability, but the authors note that CSOs can sometimes overshadow the concerns of truly marginalized communities with their own broader ideological agendas, such as opposing all mega-infrastructure.

APA

-1, MARKOWITZ, C., & DU PLESSIS, R. (2017). occasional-paper-271-aaf7f1545ec915ed.pdf. South African Institute of International Affairs. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Occasional-Paper-271.pdf

Chicago

-1, CHELSEA MARKOWITZ, and RUDOLF DU PLESSIS. occasional-paper-271-aaf7f1545ec915ed.pdf. South African Institute of International Affairs, 2017. https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Occasional-Paper-271.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=-1 |last2=MARKOWITZ |first2=CHELSEA |last3=DU PLESSIS |first3=RUDOLF |title=occasional-paper-271-aaf7f1545ec915ed.pdf |publisher=South African Institute of International Affairs |date=October 2017 |url=https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Occasional-Paper-271.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{12017occasionalpaper271aaf7f1545ec915edpdf, author = {-1 and MARKOWITZ, CHELSEA and DU PLESSIS, RUDOLF}, title = {{occasional-paper-271-aaf7f1545ec915ed.pdf}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2017}, month = oct, url = {https://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Occasional-Paper-271.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }