Oceanloop Sustainable Shrimp Farm (IEU GT2)

In December 2024, the EIB-CM received a complaint from a group of environmental non-governmental organizations active in the protection of aquatic life, concerning the project Oceanloop Sustainable Shrimp Farm, located for one part in Germany and for another part in Spain. The complaint raised several allegations concerning the EIB’s compliance with its transparency obligations in relation to the project. In particular, the complainants alleged that the EIB (i) unduly delayed the publication of the project summary on its website, that the EIB (ii) failed to disclose the project’s Environmental, Climate and Social (ECS) risk categorisation, and that it also (iii) failed to disclose the information about the project’s impact on animal welfare and biodiversity.

Work performed

The EIB-CM carried out its investigation on the complainants’ allegations by reviewing the project’s documentation and the additional information provided by the relevant EIB’s services. The EIB-CM assessed the allegations in the light of the relevant regulatory framework, particularly the EIB Group Transparency Policy, the Aarhus Regulation No 1367/2006 and the EIB Group Environmental and Social Policy. Based on the collected and analysed information, the EIB-CM prepared the conclusions report.

Conclusion

Based on its investigation, the EIB-CM concluded that the complainants’ allegation (i) is grounded, as the decision to postpone the publication of the project summary was not adopted following a due-process, both in terms of timing and of documentation. As highlighted in previous cases (see for instance SG/A/2023/01), the EIB-CM considers that the EIB should carry out a specific and timely assessment of the circumstances of the case before concluding that, to protect a certain interest in accordance with the EIB Group Transparency Policy, it is necessary to postpone the publication of the project summary on the EIB’s website. Adequate and timely documentation of such assessment should be kept.

With regard to the complainants’ allegations (ii) and (iii), the EIB-CM found no evidence of maladministration by the EIB.

The EIB is not obliged to publish on its website the specific ECS risk categorisation that it assigns to a project at pre-appraisal stage, but only to publish the environmental risk assessment of such project, which the EIB did by publishing the project’s Environmental and Social Data Sheet (ESDS).

The complainants’ claim about the publication of information on the project’s impact on animal welfare and biodiversity is premature, as this information will be part of the environmental documentation that the promoter is contractually bound to deliver to the EIB. Upon receiving it, the EIB should publish the information at hand on its website.

Outcome

The EIB-CM proposed a suggestion for improvement in relation to the complainants’ allegation (ii), notwithstanding the finding that such allegation is not grounded as the EIB is not obliged to publish the ECS risk categorisation assigned to a project at pre-appraisal stage. In view of fostering the EIB’s transparency, the EIB-CM suggests that the EIB does not delay any further the announced publication of the final project’s ECS categorisation as part of the ESDS and develops as soon as possible the internal procedures necessary for that purpose.