Owner shall remediate damage from negative community impacts

Scope

The Owner shall remediate negative impacts on the community through defined actionable steps for all impacts the Project caused, contributed, or is linked to that could not be prevented or mitigated. The aim is to neutralize past negative effects through remediation and restoration, not just halting future negative impacts. This activity is confined to the project and not the broader organizational operations.

Requirements ¹⁰¹

Act to Avoid Harm

01.

For each negative community impact, Owner level of attribution identified as caused, contributed, or directly linked (see Guidance below).
02.
Corrective actions for each negative community impact according to the level of attribution^?.
1. a.
  Projects/properties that have directly caused negative community impacts shall take the following actions for remediation:
  i. Immediate Cessation: Cease the actions causing the negative community impacts immediately. If possible, reverse the abusive activity.
  ii. Compensation: Provide compensation to the affected individuals or communities for losses suffered. This can include financial reimbursement, psychological support, medical care, etc.
  iii. Accountability: Hold accountable those individuals within the organization responsible for the negative community impacts. This could involve disciplinary action, dismissal, or in extreme cases, referral to legal authorities for potential criminal charges.
  iv. Preventative Measures: Implement strategies, policies, and procedures to prevent recurrence, such as due diligence processes, staff training, and regular monitoring and review.
2. b.
  Projects/properties that have contributed to negative community impacts shall take the following actions for remediation:
  i. Disengage: Where feasible, cease business relationships with entities causing the negative community impacts.
  ii. Mitigate: If disengagement is not immediately possible, take steps to mitigate ongoing harm, such as by using influence over the contributing partner to halt or prevent further negative community impacts.
  iii. Remediate: Assist in remediating harm, potentially through joint efforts with other entities. This could involve participating in community restoration projects, funding rehabilitation programs, etc.
  iv. Public Disclosure: Where appropriate, publicly disclose the business's contribution to the negative community impacts and the steps it has taken to address it.
3. c.
  Projects/properties directly linked to negative community impacts via their business relationships shall take the following actions for remediation:
  i. Leverage: Use their influence over business relationships to mitigate or prevent negative impacts.
  ii. Collaborate: Work with other businesses, governments, or non-governmental organizations to pressure the entity causing the negative impact to reform its practices.
  iii. Policy Implementation: Implement stricter policies for partners, including contractual clauses that stipulate adherence to standards.
  iv. Transparency and Reporting: Regularly report on their efforts to address the linked negative impact, which could include internal audits, third-party audits, and public reports.
  Note: If the above remedies are not successful, consider ending the business relationship.
03.

Compliance with all applicable laws and respect internationally recognized human rights wherever they operate. When faced with conflicting requirements, businesses should seek ways to honor the principles of internationally recognized human rights.
04.
Evaluation of the effectiveness and appropriateness of the remediation efforts through at least one of the following:
1. a.
  collect feedback from affected individuals or communities regarding their satisfaction with the remediation efforts.
2. b.
  solicit the opinion(s) of independent third-party assessors or auditors to provide an unbiased evaluation of remediation efforts.

Indicators

The performance indicator is the percentage of community impacts remediated. The first context indicator is the total number of affected individuals compensated with the type of compensation received (financial, psychological support, medical care, etc.). The second context indicator is the number of preventative measures in place, such as policies and procedures designed to prevent recurrence, due diligence processes, staff training programs, etc.

Step 1

To calculate the performance indicator:

Determine the total number of negative impacts identified during Activity IAa1.4.
For each negative impact, determine the level of attribution (caused, contributed to, or directly linked to) and the progress of implemented corrective actions as listed in the Requirements above: 25% for the first action, 50% for the second action, 75% for the third action, or 100% for all four actions (corrective actions under each attribution level in the Requirements are listed in a progressive order so they must be implemented in order to achieve progressive percentages of completion).
Calculate the weighted remediation percentage for each negative impact by multiplying the level of attribution by the corrective action progress (weights are 1.0 for caused, 0.7 for contributed to, or 0.5 for directly linked to).
Calculate the overall KPI as the average of all the weighted remediation percentages.

Step 1: Calculate the Weighted Remediation Percentage for Each Negative Impact

R# = A# x C#

Step 2

Step 2: Calculate the Overall KPI

P = (R1 + R2 + R3 + … / N) x 100

Scoring

Points assignment

Points	Percentage of Remediated Impacts
3 points	55% - 64% remediated impacts
5 points	65% - 74% remediated impacts
7 points	75% - 100% remediated impacts

Documentation

01.

List of financial, human, and material resources utilized for this activity.
02.

A comprehensive list of all identified negative impacts. It should include details about each impact, such as the nature of the impact, the parties involved, and the level of attribution.
03.

Remediation Action Plans outlining the corrective actions to be taken for each negative impact, based on the level of attribution.
04.

Regular progress reports (if applicable) would provide evidence of the implementation of the corrective actions. These should include details of the actions taken, the results achieved, and any challenges encountered. This may not be applicable if the remediation actions are completed in a short timeframe.
05.

A completion report for each negative impact when all corrective actions have been successfully implemented.
06.

A summary report of all remediation completion reports, providing a count of the total number of negative impacts and the number that have been successfully remediated.
07.

Independent audit reports (if applicable) providing third-party verification of the successful remediation of negative impacts include a detailed assessment of the effectiveness of the corrective actions and the extent of the remediation.
08.

Testimonials or statements from impacted parties (if applicable), including affected communities and other relevant parties, could provide additional evidence of the successful remediation of the negative impacts.
09.

Any legal documents (if applicable) related to the negative impacts, such as court rulings or settlement agreements, could provide further evidence of the level of attribution and the successful remediation of the impacts.
10.

Internal records (if applicable), such as meeting minutes, emails, or memos, could provide additional evidence of the actions taken to remediate the negative impacts.

Definitions

Severe negative impact (appears in Requirement ) — is one that causes significant and lasting harm to individuals or communities such as serious injury, loss of life, child labor, forced labor, discrimination, and displacement.

Guidance

On identifying level of Attribution

Attribution is defined as the action of regarding something as being caused by an Owner. There are three levels of attribution:

Directly causing an adverse community impact refers to a situation where an Owner’s actions or omissions are the immediate and primary cause of the adverse impact. In this context, the Owner is directly responsible for the harm inflicted on individuals or communities.
When an Owner contributes to adverse community impacts, it means that the Owner plays a role in facilitating or enabling the detrimental effects on the community, even if it is not the sole or direct cause of the impacts. The contribution can take various forms, such as providing financial support, resources, technology, or expertise to another entity that is directly responsible for the adverse community impacts. It can also involve benefiting from or being complicit in the actions of others that result in harmful effects on communities. Contributing to adverse community impacts implies that the Owner has some level of involvement or influence that enables or exacerbates the harm inflicted on communities.
Being directly linked to an adverse community impact means that an Owner has a clear and undeniable connection to the impact. This connection implies a direct and active involvement in the impact, either through its own actions or through its business relationships. It suggests that the Owner has a direct relationship or association with the individuals, groups, or entities responsible for the adverse community impact. This link can be established through various means, such as direct business partnerships, supply chains, investments, or contractual agreements. Being directly linked to a human rights abuse indicates a level of responsibility and accountability for the harm caused, and the Owner should take appropriate measures to address and remedy the situation.

On factors beyond business control

An Owner is not required to restore any significant area degraded by factors beyond its control and from which it does not benefit. This includes areas affected by natural disasters, climate change, and the actions of third parties with whom the company does not have – and has never had – a commercial relationship^? (e.g., public infrastructure projects, Indigenous settlements).

Referenced Source

UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (2011), Principle 16
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)