The year 2022 was an important milestone in addressing environmental and social risks in Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations’ (FAO) programmatic and normative work. The Environmental and Social Management Framework (FESM) was adopted involving an innovative process of climate change and disaster risk screening. Lev Neretin, Head of the Environmental and Social Management Unit in the FAO Office of Climate Change, Biodiversity and Environment, who was in charge of the development and oversight of FESM, outlined the key highlights of the Framework in an interview with Greening the Blue (GtB).
GtB: In June 2022, FAO adopted FESM, which establishes environmental and social performance requirements for FAO programming. What makes FESM unique compared to previous FAO efforts such as the 2015 Environmental and Social Management Guidelines?
Lev: With the adoption of the Framework for Environmental and Social Management (FESM) on 15 June 2022, FAO strengthened its approach to environmental and social risk management “in quality and quantity” bringing the Organization in line with the most progressive international standards and practice such as the UN Environmental Management Group Model Approach. It also ensures continued compliance with environmental and social safeguards requirements of our major multilateral and bilateral donors.
The FESM reflects the Organization’s commitment to mainstreaming risk management and sustainability in our programming with a set of six guiding principles, two operational pillars and nine1 Environmental and Social Standards (ESS). Together they lay out the mandatory requirements related to the identification, assessment and management of multiple environmental and social risks and impacts associated with programmes and projects supported and implemented by FAO (as highlighted in this video).
The standards contained in the 2015 Guidelines have been revised and reclassified in the FESM. The FESM expands the application of a human rights-based approach and other guiding principles of the United Nations Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework in FAO programming. We also introduced a climate change and disaster risk reduction standard and an innovative process of climate change and disaster risk screening to identify potential risks, mitigation and resilience measures. We updated requirements to conserve and restore biodiversity; protect animal welfare; foster resilient livelihoods; promote resource efficiency, and strengthened requirements for dealing with gender-based violence, including the prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse.
GtB: How will the new ESS prevent, minimize, or mitigate adverse environmental and social risks and potential impacts of FAO programs and projects?
Lev: The FESM’s ESS are based on six guiding principles: Leave no one behind, Human rights-based approach, Principle of Free Prior and Informed Consent, the Prevention of Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Harassment, Sustainability and Resilience, and Accountability. The ESS go beyond a ‘do no harm’ approach and seek to support the realization of the right to sufficient, adequate, and nutritious safe food, and strengthen programming outcomes that contribute to the realization of the FAO vision for sustainable agrifood systems. In this sense, the Framework goes beyond mitigating negative impacts and will scale up the positive impacts of FAO's interventions.
The ESS reflect an up-to-date understanding of agrifood systems and promote interlinkages between biodiversity conservation, environmental protection and climate change, gender mainstreaming, and nutrition.
The Framework applies to FAO’s entire project lifecycle. After assessing risks, projects should develop risk management plans and monitor their implementation. Furthermore, as a part of the ambitious roll out of the Framework, FAO is strengthening in-house guidance and capacity building activities among staff, including strengthening country office-level grievance redress mechanisms. This ensures that anyone who feels affected by a FAO project can provide feedback or file a grievance. This is a moral obligation and strengthens the effectiveness of FAO projects.
GtB: What challenges can FAO managers face while applying ESS to the design and implementation of large-scale programs and projects?
Lev: With a solid risk management approach, large-scale programmes and projects are well-prepared to apply the criteria established under ESS. For example, large-scale programmes and projects typically carry more risks since they implement more activities on the ground. They require effective and detailed screening, assessment, and risk mitigation. In FAO, these projects are strongly advised to hire a safeguards specialist, who will support the development of risk management plans and monitor their implementation. This investment in human resources is important from the earliest project phase onwards. Large-scale projects may also find that the number of beneficiaries they aim to reach requires a more elaborate stakeholder engagement plan and a well-coordinated grievance redress mechanism that is supported and understood by project is implementing partners.
GtB: How will the adoption of FESM affect joint projects run by FAO and external partners?
Lev: FESM is the result of an extensive internal consultation that involved technical units across headquarters and decentralized offices from all regions, and an open public consultation with FAO’s external partners and other various stakeholders. FAO’s safeguards policies meet global international standards to environmental and social risk management, and we have so far found that our policies are largely equivalent to those of our partners, e.g., Global Environment Facility and Green Climate Fund. The FESM further strengthens joint approaches by addressing risks that are common priorities for our partners, such as risks of sexual exploitation and abuse, and climate change risks.
We recognize that joint projects require a coordinated risk management approach. When projects are jointly financed with other bilateral or multilateral funding partners, FAO may agree to apply these parties’ environmental and social standards, requirements, processes, rules and policies, if they are equivalent to FAO and will enable the project to achieve objectives consistent with the FESM. Furthermore, more and more, FAO and its implementing partners will require all contractors and primary suppliers engaged in the programme or project to operate in a manner consistent with our Framework.
GtB: Can the Framework serve as best practices for other organizations, both within and outside the UN system?
Lev: We hope the FESM will be met with interest from our partners. We see this revision of the safeguards policy as a starting point to introduce a number of topical and innovative approaches. For example, we integrated climate change and disaster risk reduction directly into our safeguards policy, as a stand-alone standard. All FAO projects will screen and assess climate risks. This includes not only risks from climate change, but also any climate risks those projects may carry, such as the potential increase in greenhouse gas emissions or maladaptation practices. A specific tool based on FAO’s Climate Risk Toolbox will be launched soon to support climate and disaster risk screening process.
FESM roll-out is supported by an innovative business operation by introducing a service-based charging model that was never used for FAO projects before. This allows operationalizing the approach to the requirements that were formulated back in 2015. Together with the FESM policy, the new, improved business model is a vital step in strengthening environmental and social governance and responding to growing demands from FAO Members, donors and the wider public towards more equitable and environmentally sustainable agrifood systems. We are looking forward to sharing lessons learned during the FESM’s roll-out and the ongoing implementation with UN sister agencies and partners!