Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

This paper examines social and environmental safeguards as anticipatory assemblages where actors, norms and artifacts converge to foresee risks in international development projects. It explores how safeguards shape governance practices, navigating tensions between inclusion, power, and uncertainty.

Paper long abstract:

Social and environmental safeguards (SES) are central to international development, designed to anticipate and mitigate socio-environmental risks. This paper conceptualizes SES as anticipatory assemblages, where heterogeneous elements—material artifacts (e.g., checklists, algorithms), human actors (e.g., experts, indigenous representatives), and norms (e.g., international laws, customary practices)—converge to operationalize governance. Drawing on assemblage theory and the literature on anticipation, the paper examines how SES are shaped by future-oriented logics. Safeguards attempt to stabilize uncertainty by translating imagined risks into actionable practices. Yet, these processes reveal tensions: anticipatory tools often privilege technocratic expertise, sidelining local and Indigenous knowledge, while safeguards' material artifacts (e.g., monitoring frameworks) both enable and constrain participatory governance. Using ethnographic insights from safeguard implementation in diverse contexts, the paper explores moments of success and failure within these assemblages. It highlights cases where safeguards foster inclusivity and adaptability but also instances of procedural overload, fragmentation, and exclusion. The findings emphasize that while anticipatory assemblages can serve as tools for navigating crises, they are also sites of contestation, where competing priorities and power asymmetries shape outcomes. By framing safeguards as anticipatory assemblages, the paper offers a novel lens for understanding the intersection of governance, risk, and futures in international development. It calls for more reflexive practices that prioritize inclusivity, contextual adaptability, and transparency in the design and deployment of safeguards.