Equator Principles

Equator Principles is usually adopted for project financing by more and more of international banks these days.

It's because today's financial institutions usually take environmental issues seriously into consideration as they could not evade lender liability in an increasing number of cases. On the international scene, a brand-new concept of the Equator Principles in the New Millenium has driven more and more international banks to adopt these Principles in project financing.

Key words
Equator Principles, sustainable development (SD), Ramsar Convention, project finance, environmental risk

Background
Sustainable development has been a key word in understanding new trends of the governments, financial institutions, corporations and civic groups in the 21st century. The Equator Principles are a set of voluntary environmental and social guidelines for sustainable finance. The Equator Principles commit bank officers to avoid financial support to projects that fail to meet these guidelines. The Equator Principles were conceived in 2002 on an initiative of the International Finance Corporation(IFC), and launched in June 2003.

Since then, dozens of major banks, accounting for up to 80 percent of project loan market, have adopted the Equator Principles. Accordingly, the Equator Principles have become the de facto standard for all banks and investors on how to deal with potential social and environmental issues of projects to be financed. The official Website is conveying detailed information about the Equator Priciples (EP), news about which bank has adopted EP and what EP Association is doing.

Compliance of the Principles
Compliance with the Equator Principles facilitates for endorsing banks to participate in the syndicated loan and help them to manage the risks associated with large-scale projects.

The Equator Principles call for financial institutions to provide loans to projects under the following circumstances:
 * The risk of the project is categorized in accordance with internal guidelines based upon the environmental and social screening criteria of the IFC.
 * For Category A and B projects, borrowers or sponsors are required to conduct a Social and Environmental Assessment, the preparation of which must meet certain requirements and satisfactorily address key social and environmental issues.
 * The Social and Environmental Assessment report should address baseline social and environmental conditions, requirements under host country laws and regulations, sustainable development, and, as appropriate, IFC's Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines, etc.
 * Based on the Social and Environmental Assessment, Equator banks then make agreements with borrowers on how they mitigate, monitor and manage the risks through a Social and Environmental Management System.

Compliance with the plan is included in the covenant clause of loan agreements. If the borrower doesn't comply with the agreed terms, the bank will take corrective actions.

Implications on the Financial Markets
The Equator Principles are not a mere declaration of cautious banks but a full commitment of lenders. A violation of the Principles in the process of project financing, which led to an unexpected damage to the affected community, would not give rise to any specific legal remedies other than ordinary lawsuits. So it is more effective for banks to ensure consistent implementation of the Principles and to have them take responsible measures to solve social and environmental issues.

Saemangeum Case
Public interests have recently mounted up with respect to environmental issues on the occasion of the Supreme Court's decision 2006Du330 delivered on March 26, 2006 on the fiercely debated reclamation project at Saemangeum. The majority Justices said that the expected environmental damages like probable pollution of water and soil were not believed so serious and that the Administration should continue to implement the project seeking ways to make it more environment friendly. In this case, though the Category A Saemangeum Project was carried out by a government agency, the Supreme Court behaved itself as a signal giver to approve or stop the environment-related project like an Equator bank in project financing.

Prospects
At present, there is no Equator bank in Korea in contrast to three big banks in Japan. Also Korean contractors, which are aggressively bidding for Category A-type projects in South East Asia and Mideast, might find themselves in a disadvantageous position because they are generally ignorant of the environmental assessment associated with project financing.

In this regard, Korean banks and overseas project contractors should care for the revised Equator Principles and the latest developments in project financing more seriously. It's because its scope has expanded to the capital cost of US$10 million or more across all industry sectors regardless of developing countries or not. It should be noted that, for a Korean bank, being an Equator bank is more or less burdensome in a short-term period, but it must be conducive to minimizing risks and building up good reputation in the long run.