Projects Missing Indigenous Peoples (PS7) Analysis

The database assembled by NomoGaia analyzing public data regarding IFC’s potential impact on indigenous peoples is available on this page, both as a downloadable file and through the search function below.

Search
Project NameProject NumberCountryCategoryNature of Indigenous Risk
Probiotech 33069 Nepal B Agricultural input sourcing and evaluation of greenfield development near brownfield operations both pose potential impacts to IPs in the country context
DJEPL and UUPPL 34565 India B Operation claim that tribal land won't be purchased - not that STs and SCs won't be affected. 1/3 of Mamatkheda and 1/5 of Pingrala is ST/SC https://bit.ly/33au2Ip
On Telecom 33142 Brazil B E&S review for PS1 was expected "to identify and mitigate" IP impacts but no assessment of IPs is documented
PPC Barnet DRC 34135 Congo - Democratic Republic of A No ESIA is available (NTS describes what the ESIA would likely cover). It's unclear how the displaced communities have been identified as 'not indigenous'
GTST Ethiopia II 34934 Ethiopia B A driver for this project is a proposed gas line to Addis - nearly 1000 km away. IPs should be evaluated on the corridor
Lucid Colloids 34335 India B Willing buyer/willing seller approaches are used to justify bypassing PS7 without determining indigenous presence
Helios Towers Africa Ltd 34963 Africa Region B See Helios HTA II documentation which is identical
Terra AMC 34451 Congo - Democratic Republic of A IFC would need to articulate how it made determinations of indigeneity in Katanga. "No IPs are present in the area of the farms or where the mill is located
Tuxpan 32817 Mexico B Veracruz is 29 percent indigenous. It is unclear how affected peoples non-indigeneity was determined
Agrotec Extension 34095 Paraguay B PS7 could consider whether Agrotec services are promoting agricultural development on indigenous lands in Paraguay

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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