Complaint Pathfinder | Accountability Console

Learn the basics: Definitions, questions, and dispute resolution vs. compliance review

Start by understanding key definitions, essential questions to consider before you file a complaint, and explore the benefits and limitations of dispute resolution and compliance review to make informed decisions.

Download the basics

Key definitions

An international financial institution is an organization that provides financial support (such as loans and grants) and technical support to projects worldwide. These institutions include development banks, aid agencies, and commercial banks. They might support projects with governments ("public sector projects"), with corporations ("private sector projects"), or both.

These institutions also include national export promotion agencies or export credit agencies, which are government-run organizations that give loans, grants and insurance to domestic corporations doing business abroad. The goal of this support is to promote domestic companies, and to contribute to development abroad.

For the purpose of this guide, we will call all of these institutions “banks”.

Many banks have created accountability mechanisms to hear from communities impacted by the projects they have financed. Accountability mechanisms are offices connected to banks that can help fix issues stemming from projects funded by these banks. Accountability mechanisms usually fix these issues through dispute resolution (also known as mediation), or by investigating the bank and making sure the bank is following its own rules (also known as a compliance review). You can learn more about the difference between dispute resolution and compliance review below.

Not all banks have accountability mechanisms. While most development banks have them, only a limited number of commercial banks and export agencies have accountability mechanisms.

The independence and effectiveness of different accountability mechanisms can vary significantly. In our explanations of each mechanism, we will highlight their strengths and weaknesses.

When we talk about accountability mechanisms in this guide, we usually mean independent offices attached to international banks. However, it is important to note that some accountability mechanisms have different structures or functions. For example:

National contact points (NCPs) are offices at the national level that promote and enforce rules set by the OECD for businesses operating in multiple countries. If a community has been harmed by the activities of a multinational company operating in, or headquartered in their country, they can approach the national contact point of that country to file a complaint.

We have a dedicated section explaining how to use NCPs.
Management-led grievance mechanisms are established and managed by banks themselves, without any independence from bank management. These mechanisms can be more efficient for resolving simple issues, but they lack the thoroughness, transparency, and independence of accountability mechanisms.

We have included a few examples of management-led grievance mechanisms in this guide, but we advise caution when using them due to their lack of independence.
Project-level grievance mechanisms are offices set up at the start of a project, controlled by companies, and used to report problems directly to the companies. These mechanisms sometimes have conflicts of interest, and may not be fair, independent or transparent.

This guide does not cover how to use project-level grievance mechanisms.

Questions to ask yourself

While a company may be the direct cause of harm, who are the groups that have invested in the project?

If the project you are complaining about has had an investment from a bank in this guide, you may be able to complain to that bank’s accountability mechanism as described in this guide.

You may find the following resources helpful when completing research to identify investors in a project causing you harm:

“Early Warning System”: identifies internationally-financed projects that pose a high risk of harm.
“Follow the Money” resource hub and guide: you can use this guide to help you figure out what groups have invested in the project causing you harm.
“The Counter”: a global helpdesk providing corporate research to expose and challenge companies causing environmental and social harm.

Are they directly or indirectly affected by the project? How are they impacted?

Communities that have been harmed have rights under international and domestic laws, as well as the rights created by the policies of the bank that helped fund the project.

To figure out your rights, you can ask us for help, or you can approach local or international organizations that work in this field. We have put together a list of some organizations working in this field below. They may be able to provide advice on your rights.

When they work well, accountability mechanisms provide a practical, community-centered way to raise concerns about harmful projects. In some cases, they can lead to the suspension or redesign of those projects, or to compensation for harm caused. However, it's important to recognize that they have significant limitations too. Here is a list of the most important benefits and limitations:

Benefits

Free and accessible: Communities do not have to pay to file a complaint to an accountability mechanism, and it is not necessary to have a lawyer.
Independent: Accountability mechanism staff are separate from the project developers, so they can offer a neutral perspective.
Community centered: Accountability mechanisms give the affected community a chance to be heard at the highest level of the bank, and have their concerns considered in any solutions reached.
Non-legal process: Accountability mechanisms are not courts. While they evaluate a bank's compliance with its policies (including relevant legal frameworks), they avoid many of the legal, technical, and practical barriers to litigation. There are no strict requirements for evidence. The process also can be quicker than going to court, but this is not always the case.
Potential solutions: Accountability mechanisms can lead to negotiated outcomes like compensation, changes to the project, or other remedies. They can also provide important lessons for investors, leading to changes in policies and procedures to prevent harm in the future.

Limitations

Limited power: Accountability mechanisms can't force companies or banks to act. Solutions ultimately depend on the bank's leadership and clients agreeing to take action. This does not always happen. In some cases, harm may be acknowledged but remain unremediated.
Slow process: Even though accountability mechanisms are less formal than courts, the process can still take years to get results.
Limited scope: Accountability mechanisms only apply to projects funded by certain banks or institutions, not all international investments.
Mixed results: While some communities achieve real change through these processes, others feel that the complaint did not improve their situation.

It’s important to be aware that there may be no positive outcome as a result of complaining to an accountability mechanism.

Depending on the situation, a realistic outcome may simply be to bring attention to the issue and create a record of the harm (which can be used in other advocacy). In other cases, you may expect some form of corrective action or remedy, including changes to the project, or compensation for harm. For more information about the frequency and types of remedies obtained through accountability mechanism strategies, see our outcomes research summary.

The entire complaint process can be time-consuming, and take one or more years. While there are no fees to use accountability mechanisms, a community will likely incur costs to organize meetings, transportation, etc.

Note that it may be possible to receive financial or other help from the accountability mechanism, or local or international NGOs.

Confidentiality may not always be maintained in this process, and retaliation could be a real danger. It is important that you and other community members are aware of these risks and plan for them.

You will generally be asked by the bank to nominate ‘community representatives’ who will negotiate on behalf of your community. The group of people chosen as representatives can strengthen the community’s negotiation power and share the burden of advocacy. Communities should think about having a diverse group of representatives, a communication strategy between the representatives and the community, and conflict resolution processes in place.

It is important to include women as representatives to help guide the work and make sure that the complaint is comprehensive, and highlights issues that are specific to women and girls. During follow-up work, it is also important to include women in decision-making and ensure that the process of seeking accountability is empowering them.

When women share stories of abuse, concerns about their livelihoods, mental and physical health and safety, and other gender-related impacts of projects, it is essential to make sure that these stories are heard and recorded in formal complaints to accountability mechanisms.

It is important to respect womens confidentiality, security and decision-making about how and when their stories are shared.

Communities will often need many tactics working together, as each tactic is part of the overall campaign. The order in which you use these tactics depends on the specific case and circumstances. Some examples of tactics are:

Filing complaints to accountability mechanisms, as discussed in this Guide.
Getting support for your campaign from local groups of people who share your concerns.
Asking governments to help by exerting pressure on the people or organizations responsible for the harm.
Talking to the people or organizations responsible for the harm and seeing if you can work out a solution.
Figure out who makes decisions at the bank. If the board of directors makes decisions, build relationships with directors to help influence their decisions; especially those relevant to your country or those with the highest voting powers.
Talking to the media to share your story and get broader public involvement.
Filing a lawsuit in a local, foreign or international court against the organizations involved in the harmful project. Depending on the rules of the particular accountability mechanism you are considering using, you may be able to pursue a complaint process and a lawsuit in parallel, or you may not. See our individual mechanism pages for more information.
Talking to groups like the UN Working Group on Business and Human Rights or other UN Special Rapporteurs, who may provide assistance in cases of human rights abuses.

Keeping a comprehensive record of all the information about the harm experienced by the community is very important for accountability reasons. Where possible:

take pictures and videos of events or places
take notes, and record interviews with those harmed
take detailed notes of any meetings held with local officials or representatives of corporations or organizations, and
keep records of all steps that have been taken to resolve your problem

This will provide you with evidence, a timelines and testimonies to support your complaint.

If you need help with your strategy or hace questions about any of the issues discussed here, we encourage you to fill out our advice request here: https://accountabilitycounsel.org/advice. This will help us better understand your situation and connect you with the most relevant advice and resources.

Depending on your needs, we may provide advice directly or refer you to experienced organizations that can support you in navigating the accountability mechanism process.

Dispute resolution vs. compliance review

Most accountability mechanisms offer two methods for addressing complaints: dispute resolution and compliance review.

Dispute Resolution

Dispute resolution involves bringing the community, the company or government implementing the project, and/or the bank together in a facilitated discussion, to find solutions that everyone can agree on. This can involve dialogue, joint fact-finding, mediation, negotiation, and facilitation. It is a voluntary process, and any party can choose not to participate. If it is successful, it will result in an agreement that addresses the community's concerns, incorporating the community’s own ideas for solutions. If a dispute resolution is not successful, or not wanted by one or more of the parties, the complaint will proceed to compliance review.

Benefits

Communities can have a say in decision-making processes through direct negotiation with the company or government agency implementing the project.

A professional mediator may help everyone find common ground, build better relationships, and resolve differences.

You can ask for input into who the mediator is, to ensure the mediator is legitimate and trusted by all parties.

Community representatives may be able to negotiate solutions, such as compensation, increased transparency, stakeholder engagement, and stronger environmental and social protection.

The accountability mechanism will monitor the implementation of any agreement reached, providing public transparency on whether the commitments in the agreement will be accomplished.

Show more Show less

Limitations

Participation is voluntary, and the company or government agency implementing the project may choose not to participate.

The process requires significant time and coordination from community representatives and unified demands from the affected community.

Solutions need to be negotiated and agreed upon by all parties, which often requires compromises.

Community representatives may need to limit their public messaging (including media) to comply with confidentiality obligations. This could affect broader campaign goals.

Show more Show less

Compliance review

Compliance review is a fact-finding process conducted by the accountability mechanism. The accountability mechanism investigates whether the bank has complied with its environmental and social policies, and whether any non-compliance has harmed the community. It usually results in a report with findings and recommendations for how the bank should comply with its policies. The bank itself, usually the Board of Directors, generally makes the final decision about what steps the bank will take.

Benefits

The compliance process does not require agreement from all parties to be initiated.

The accountability mechanism conducts an independent investigation, producing a detailed public report that may validate community concerns.

Community members have an opportunity to share their experiences with the investigation team.

Requires less time and resources for the community, in comparison to dispute resolution

The public report may be a useful tool for broader campaign goals.

Communities can continue engaging in other forms of advocacy, including strong public messaging. Confidentiality is not required during a compliance review.

Show more Show less

Limitations

There is a risk that the accountability mechanism or the bank’s Board of Directors may choose not to conduct an in-depth investigation.

The process usually takes one year or longer to complete.

The accountability mechanism lacks the power to force the bank to take corrective action, remedy or divest. Community representatives and their advisors may need to advocate directly to the Board of Directors for meaningful changes, which still offers no guarantee of desired outcomes.

Communities have limited opportunities to shape the bank’s decisions on corrective actions; they are usually determined by the bank alone (although consultation may be required).

Show more Show less

Get support

If you're seeking help to challenge harmful internationally financed projects, we may be able to support you. Please use the form below to share details.

Trouble with the form? Email us at advice@accountabilitycounsel.org.

Complete the form

Using the form below, please tell us about any project causing harm to communities and the environment and we will offer you tailored advice on potential accountability strategies.

What is your name?*

What is your email address?*

What is your phone number?*

What organization are you affiliated with?

In what country are you based?*

How would you like us to contact you?

What languages can you communicate in?*

Other language(s)

What's the name/nature of the project threatening communities or the environment?*

What do you need advice on?

How to hold banks accountable for harm

Learn the basics: Definitions, questions, and dispute resolution vs. compliance review

Key definitions

Questions to ask yourself

Benefits

Limitations

Dispute resolution vs. compliance review

How to file a complaint

Get support