Information Sharing and Disclosure

Background and Rationale for the Review of ADB's Policy on Confidentiality and Disclosure of Information

Background and Rationale

In September 1994, ADB's Board of Directors approved the Policy on Confidentiality and Disclosure of Information ("Disclosure Policy"), which took effect on 1 January 1995. In August 1994, ADB's Board of Directors approved the Information Policy and Strategy of ADB, which, inter alia, called for the proactive dissemination of information to raise public awareness of ADB operations and development issues in the Asian and Pacific region. The Disclosure Policy heralded an era of greater openness at ADB, and clarified what documents could be released to the public and under what circumstances.

Internal reviews of ADB's Disclosure Policy have found that, in general, it has been implemented effectively, and that requests for documents have usually been satisfied. The Disclosure Policy has made substantially more information about ADB available to external audiences, and in the process has helped raise public awareness of ADB's role, objectives, and operations.

Nevertheless, in the years since ADB began implementing its Disclosure Policy, expectations for accountability and transparency in public institutions at all levels have risen. Some governments, national and transnational civil society organizations, and some media have called for greater openness. The climate in which ADB operates has changed over the years and a policy drafted to the standards of the mid-1990s may now be regarded by some as inadequate. In this light, a number of factors support a review of the Disclosure Policy:

• ADB typically reviews its policies after some years. For example, the Inspection Policy, approved around the same time as the Disclosure Policy, has been substantially revised after a review involving extensive stakeholder consultations.



• In September 2001, the World Bank approved an expanded disclosure policy following a major review. Within the past two years, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-American Development Bank, and the International Monetary Fund have also reviewed their disclosure and transparency policies.



• G-7 finance ministers and central bank governors have asked the multilateral development banks to make "draft and final key policy and strategy documents available to the public."



• Some governments have called for greater transparency and accountability in the context of the recent mid-term review of the Asian Development Fund.



• Over 50 NGOs have urged ADB to conduct a consultative review of its Disclosure Policy. Access to information about evolving projects and policies is a regular item on the agenda of civil society organizations meeting with ADB staff.



• Some sections of the Disclosure Policy have become outdated following ADB's recent reorganization, its adoption of new business processes, changes in document titles, and the increased use of electronic media for information dissemination.



• Some staff in ADB's operational departments and Resident Missions have noted that the Disclosure Policy, and its corresponding section in ADB's Operations Manual, do not provide clear guidance in all areas.



• Public opinion and regulatory authorities expect more information from both private and public sector organizations than was the case a decade ago. Since then, several Asian countries have adopted freedom of information policies.



• Major developments in information and communication technologies, including Internet-based systems, have promoted the freer flow of information among individuals, groups, organizations, and nations.

In addition to the abovementioned considerations, a public review of the Disclosure Policy would complement ADB's intention to expand awareness of its role, objectives, and operations among member governments and other stakeholders.

Overall Assessment of the Current Policy

Experience has shown that implementation of ADB's policy on Confidentiality and Disclosure of Information ("Disclosure Policy") has been generally effective. After an initial year or two of transition, processing requests for documents has become largely routine, and most requests are promptly fulfilled. ADB has undertaken several steps to proactively support information dissemination. Nevertheless, ADB staff and external users of information about ADB have identified certain areas where improvements could be made.

In April 1997, an inter-departmental meeting was held in ADB to review implementation of the Disclosure Policy over its first two years. The chairman's meeting summary noted that although the policy contained complex issues, it had worked quite well to date. It was recognized, however, that there was room for refinement and improvement. For example, the reviewers cited the need for a section on disclosure in the Operations Manual.

Implementation of the Disclosure Policy has been supported by the Depository Library Program. Established in January 1994, the Program now comprises over 160 libraries in more than 40 countries and territories. Over 300 documents and publications are sent to each of the depository libraries annually. The ADB web site has played an increasingly important role in making documentation available to the public. Today, those interested in ADB documents tend to view them on the Internet rather than request the documents in hard copy format. However, low Internet penetration rates and low rates of English comprehension in many member countries hinder access to, and comprehension of, ADB documents provided through the web site.

Awareness of the Disclosure Policy among ADB staff and externally has over the years been promoted by briefings and pamphlets, as well as through regular notices sent to NGOs to report new document releases.

To recover some of the implementation costs of the Disclosure Policy, the Office of External Relations (formerly the Information Office) has charged a $10 handling fee to fulfill document requests. However, this fee is waived for requesters from non-profit organizations seeking documents concerning their own country.

Although not explicitly stated in the Disclosure Policy, loan agreements are now recognized as documents that usually can be released after Board approval. This interpretation of the Disclosure Policy was included in Section L3 of ADB's Operations Manual, adopted on 27 March 2003.

Feedback and Comments from Users

The Office of External Relations has frequently received feedback from document requesters expressing appreciation for quick and positive replies from ADB. Yet stakeholder comments have not been uniformly positive. Advocacy NGOs and residents in project areas have complained about lack of access to documentation at an early stage of project development, when information tends to remain "confidential" under the Disclosure Policy. They also have urged ADB to provide documentation in local languages. Requesters sometimes expressed frustration at being denied documents in situations where the Disclosure Policy requires government approval and such approval has not been forthcoming. Some have also reported inconsistencies in the application of the Disclosure Policy, particularly at the Resident Mission level.

Implementation concerns raised by ADB staff have included:

• lack of clarity regarding the "disclosability" of documents produced under technical assistance
• certain documents cited in the Disclosure Policy no longer exist, in some cases having been superceded by other types of documents
• updating of project and program profiles is inconsistent and not always performed within the timeframes prescribed by the Disclosure Policy

The Disclosure Policy in Numbers

• The most commonly requested categories of documents have been Technical Assistance Reports and Reports and Recommendations of the President.



• The organizations that currently account for the greatest number of document requests are, in order, businesses (including consultancy firms), universities and other academic institutions, and nongovernment organizations (NGOs).



• In 1995, the year in which the Disclosure Policy took effect, the Information Office recorded 116 requests for documents. This figure rose sharply to over 500 in 1999, but has subsequently declined, in large part to greater use of the Internet.



• In the first six months of 2003, the Office of External Relations' Publication Unit and the Public Information Center received 304 document requests, of which only three could not be fulfilled (because documents were classified as confidential).

These numbers fall far short of the total number of documents provided to the public. Some requests, handled directly by regional departments or Resident Missions, have not been centrally recorded by the Office of External Relations. Further, the numbers exclude documents provided in bulk by the PIC to staff for distribution at conferences, as well as documents sent to ADB's Depository Libraries. Of even greater significance, the numbers do not take into account documents "downloaded" from ADB's website.

A more accurate reflection of the dissemination of ADB published materials would be the number of copies of documents and for-sale publications printed annually (minus those remaining in stock), and the number of Internet downloads. Together, these total in the hundreds of thousands of copies each year. For example, in the month of June 2003 alone, the paper on ADB's new Accountability Mechanism was downloaded from the Internet 8,650 times.

Conclusion

The Disclosure Policy has generally worked well in practice, with its implementation aided over the years by electronic dissemination of documents and a global network of Depository Libraries. However, some parts of the Disclosure Policy are now outdated and others could benefit from clarification. In addition, concerns have been raised about some inconsistency in implementation. Several users have urged that the Disclosure Policy be revised to strengthen the "presumption of disclosure," and to expand the range of documents covered.

Steering Committee Terms of Reference

ADB President Tadao Chino approved the creation of a Steering Committee (SC) to oversee the review process on 29 May 2003. The Steering Committee was tasked to

• oversee a comprehensive review of the Policy on Confidentiality and Disclosure of Information



• determine, and submit to the President for approval, a detailed Plan of Action, including the scope, activities, and timeframe appropriate for such review



• determine necessary staff resources for the review, designate a working group, and engage consultant services and administrative support as required



• provide policy guidance to the designated working group, review and supervise the working group's output, and clear drafts for circulation



• consider implications of the review for the Information Policy and Strategy of ADB



• meet as and when necessary to assess progress, and ensure that the review is carried out in a thorough, comprehensive, cost-effective, and professional manner



• ensure that the process of review included solicitation and consideration of the views of all concerned stakeholders



• ensure that the ADB web site was used effectively in the review process. The SC also determined the timing and content of information posted on the ADB web site