Standards library
A practical guide to IFC PS-5, World Bank ESS-5 and AfDB OS-2 for land acquisition, compensation, livelihood restoration and monitoring.
This page is an orientation layer, not a substitute for the applicable standard, legal advice or project-specific instrument. Always read the primary source and the lender’s project requirements.
Primary frameworks
The frameworks differ in language and institutional setting, but projects still have to answer the same operational questions: who is affected, what is owed, when it is delivered, and how the outcome is demonstrated.
IFC PS-5
The core IFC standard for land acquisition and involuntary resettlement. It distinguishes physical and economic displacement and sets the practical test for replacement cost, eligibility and livelihood restoration.
Primary source ↗World Bank ESS-5
The World Bank framework for land acquisition, restrictions on land use and involuntary resettlement. It is applied with the Environmental and Social Framework and the project’s documented resettlement instruments.
Primary source ↗AfDB OS-2
The AfDB safeguard on involuntary resettlement. It is especially relevant to African infrastructure and reinforces the need for eligibility evidence, compensation, consultation, livelihood restoration and monitoring.
Primary source ↗Operational comparison
The question is not simply who holds a title. A defensible RAP identifies people with formal rights, recognisable claims and affected improvements or livelihoods before the cut-off date.
Replacement cost is an outcome, not a label on a valuation sheet: current replacement inputs, transaction costs and relevant fees are considered without an inappropriate deduction for depreciation.
A payment is not automatically a restored livelihood. Baseline information, measures, responsibilities, indicators and follow-up evidence are needed where income or production is affected.
A mechanism needs more than an inbox. It needs accessible intake, classification, responsibility, escalation, response times, confidentiality where appropriate and closure evidence.
The standards converge on the need to know whether outcomes were achieved. The practical difference between a weak and strong RAP is often the quality of its evidence architecture and independent review.
Continue the work
A longer analysis of eligibility, valuation, livelihoods and monitoring.
Turn requirements into loss categories, eligibility and delivery rules.
Track outcomes with baselines, formulas, frequency and targets.
See how the record moves through review, approval and audit.