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
Pan Pacific VN 34305 Vietnam B Unknown footprint for expanded operations
Summit Bibiyana II Power Company Limited 30542 Bangladesh A See paper
CHSC Limited 35033 Egypt B Client has no feasible complaint mechanism (given Egyptian political context) and IPs lack legal protections. Yet IFC accepted client ESDD on downgradient community impacts/identification
Heineken Rwanda 35078 Rwanda B IFC does not say how client determined there are no indigenous peoples in Gisenyi. A methodology would be needed as IP identification could be complicated
Tinka 35873 Peru B This is campesino lands - descendants of Incas
Yaoure 34822 Cote D'Ivoire B Indigenous peoples are present in Cote d'Ivoire - and the project has a large footprint and area of impact. IFC project summaries make no mention of indigenous peoples at all
Ooredoo Myanmar 34170 Myanmar B The physical footprint of the network could affect IP lands compounding IP impacts associated with internet technology
Portea Medical 37150 India B As there are no physical assets . . . and company operations are mainly based at patients homes" PS7 is bypassed. But workers come from poorest states and marginalized castes
Robi Axiata II 36136 Bangladesh B Focus is explicitly on hill tribe areas
Cimenterie de Lukala SA 36898 Congo - Democratic Republic of B This footprint is massive - spanning lime quarries - sand quarries and a cement factory. How IFC determined indigeneity in DRC is never articulated - but PS7 did "not apply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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