A Guide to Designing and Implementing Grievance Mechanisms for ...

Chapter 2. Understanding Grievance
Mechanisms
A grievance mechanism should be in place
throughout the entire project cycle.
A project-level grievance mechanism is a locally based, formalized way for a company to accept,
assess, and resolve community complaints related to company activities. It offers a package of
widely understood and effective procedures for solving problems that are culturally appropriate,
in combination with specially trained personnel, and aims to help parties reach speedy, efficient,
and acceptable resolutions with dignity, justice, and finality.
The grievance mechanism draws upon conflict resolution resources from several areas—those inside
the company, traditional and customary systems, and private systems (mediation, conciliation,
arbitration). 6 These approaches complement one another and act together in a coordinated way.
Sometimes a company representative and a community member sit together informally and
work out an agreement on their own. Other times, a trusted third party—possibly a mediator,
technical expert, local authority, ombudsman, or wise person—may help the parties talk or
suggest ways in which they can resolve their dispute fairly.
A grievance mechanism should be in place throughout the entire project cycle, beginning with
the planning phases and continuing through construction and operations, until the end of the
project life. While the grievance mechanism may evolve as the project moves through various
phases, the dual goals of accountability to stakeholders and risk reduction remain constant.
Some Guiding Principles
Some of the approaches to grievance resolution advocated in this Advisory Note are grounded
in principles of mediation and interest-based negotiation common to the field of alternative
dispute resolution (ADR). ADR approaches emphasize creating an enabling environment for
inclusive decision making and generation of locally owned decisions. Ultimately, ADR approaches
focus on empowering parties to participate in a process that is fair, principled, and robust.
There are circumstances when interest-based conciliation approaches are not appropriate or
desirable to one or the other party in a dispute. Under these circumstances, arbitration or
judicial recourse may be more appropriate after careful consideration. Some observers are
concerned that interest-based approaches can encourage one party (usually the weaker) to
compromise or negotiate away its fundamental human rights. Clearly, any grievance mechanism
incorporating mediation or other interest-based processes must be grounded in a framework of
ethics and principles that should not be violated. A report from the UN Special Representative
on business and human rights suggests that grievance mechanisms should be:
• Legitimate. A mechanism must have clear, transparent, and sufficiently independent
governance structures to ensure that no party to a particular grievance process can
interfere with the fair conduct of that process.
• Accessible. A mechanism must be publicized to those who may wish to access it and
provide adequate assistance for aggrieved parties who may face barriers of access,
including language, literacy, awareness, finance, distance, or fear of reprisal.
17