Stabilisation clauses

This page presents all relevant good practice case studies that showcase how business have addressed the Stabilisation clauses dilemma. Case studies have been developed in close collaboration with a range of multi-national companies and relevant government, inter-governmental and civil society stakeholders. We also draw on public domain sources, including the UN Global Compact's own published Communications on Progress through which signatories are required to report on their performance against the Ten Principles.

The case studies explore the specific dilemmas and challenges faced by each organisation, good practice actions they have taken to resolve them and the results of such action. We reference challenges as well as achievements and invite you to submit commentary and suggestions through the Forum.

IN-DEPTH (Print seperately) BTC Pipeline: Easing restrictions on host states' regulatory freedom - Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey

IN-DEPTH (Print seperately) Mittal Steel: Renegotiation of post-conflict stabilisation terms - Liberia

IN-DEPTH (Print seperately) Tullow Oil: Narrowing the scope of stabilisation - Uganda

IFC: Promoting project legitimacy and private sector transparency – Global

The International Financial Corporation’s (IFC) Policy on Social and Environmental Sustainability supports effective engagement with stakeholders. This requires that investors disclose project information, including certain key terms of agreements. This is particularly required when the key terms of agreements can have broader implications for the public at large and which may affect third parties. By implication, this also includes the terms of relevant stabilisation clauses. This commitment to transparency around project information is also reflected in the IFC’s sector-specific policy undertakings on governance and disclosure. For instance, with regard to extractive projects, the IFC requires the disclosure of the relevant terms of key agreements that are of public concern, such as host government agreements (HGAs) and intergovernmental agreements (IGAs). The IFC policies are translated into practice by means of eight Performance Standards. Performance Standard 1 on Social and Environmental Assessment and Management System also incorporates disclosure requirements. It provides that “community engagement will be free of external manipulation, interference, or coercion and intimidation, and conducted on the basis of timely, relevant, understandable and accessible information”.