GBV in infrastructure projects: from policy to operational action plan

Gender-based violence (GBV) covers a broad field: physical, sexual or psychological violence, harassment, sexual exploitation and abuse (SEA), forced marriage, mutilation. In the context of an infrastructure project, three categories of situations recur frequently enough to be treated as structural risks.

Violence between workers on the construction site, particularly sexual harassment suffered by the few women present in highly masculinised environments.

Sexual exploitation and abuse committed by workers against members of neighbouring communities, often through economically asymmetric relationships (sexual exchanges for favours, for jobs, for protection).

The aggravation of intra-family GBV in communities affected by the project, particularly when the economic stress of displacement or changes in income balance undermine couple relationships.

DFI frameworks have integrated these risks over the past ten years. The World Bank published a Good Practice Note on preventing GBV in investment projects in 2017. The IFC supplemented its Performance Standards (PS2 and PS4) with specific guidance notes. The AfDB integrated GBV into its Integrated Safeguards System. All major lenders now require a GBV action plan for projects with high or substantial risks.

This article presents the five components of an operational GBV plan and the typical errors that invalidate these plans at the first field test.

Structural risk factors on infrastructure construction sites

Five factors, often combined, make large construction sites high-risk GBV environments.

The massive influx of external labour. A construction site frequently mobilises several hundred, even thousands of workers from distant regions, sometimes other countries. This sudden presence transforms the local economy, creates demands for services that are deployed informally, and establishes economic power relationships that can degenerate.

The long duration. A construction site lasting three to five years produces long-presence situations that undermine family dynamics (workers separated from their homes, informal relationships, children born during the construction).

Strong masculinisation. Construction teams are overwhelmingly male. Women present (catering, cleaning, minority management) are exposed to disproportionate risks of harassment and assault.

Economic asymmetry. Workers' wages, even modest by international standards, are often higher than local communities' incomes. This asymmetry creates exchange situations where consent is difficult to assess.

Isolated temporary facilities. Worker camps, accommodation bases, provisional living areas are closed environments where group dynamics can override external rules, with little visibility from management or authorities.

These five factors do not mean that every construction site produces GBV, but they explain why the risk cannot be treated as residual.

Component 1: risk assessment from the study phase

The GBV plan is not improvised at the start of construction; it is structured from the impact assessment. The initial assessment must answer several questions.

What are the gender dynamics of the territory concerned (women's position, documented pre-existing violence, available support services)?

What are the project-specific risk factors (size of labour mobilised, proportion of external workers, duration, location relative to communities)?

What are the mobilisable local services (health centres, specialised NGOs, social services, women's associations, legal services)?

This assessment, which falls jointly under PS2 and PS4, produces a diagnosis that informs the four other components.

Component 2: operational prevention measures

Prevention is not limited to awareness-raising. It combines organisational and behavioural measures.

The code of conduct. Each worker, before taking up their position, signs a code of conduct that explicitly states prohibited behaviours (harassment, exploitation, abuse) and associated sanctions. The code is written in working languages, presented orally during induction, and signed individually.

Separation of facilities. Workers' living spaces are physically separate from those of neighbouring communities. Access is controlled in both directions. Female workers' routes within the accommodation base are secured (separate accommodation, lockable separate sanitary facilities, lit pathways).

Exit rules. Workers' outings to neighbouring communities are managed, with schedules, authorised zones and behavioural rules. This measure, sometimes perceived as restrictive, is protection for workers and communities alike.

Training of supervisors. Site managers, HSE officers, community liaison officers receive specific training on detecting and handling GBV situations. This training is renewed periodically.

Component 3: dedicated GBV grievance mechanism

GBV grievances cannot pass through the general construction site grievance mechanism. Their nature requires a specific system, built around three principles.

Absolute confidentiality. Grievances are received and processed by a separate team, usually entrusted to a partner NGO or external mediator, under strict protocol. No identifying information circulates outside this team without the explicit consent of the complainant.

Referral to services. The mechanism's main role is not to investigate but to refer the complainant to specialised services (medical, psychological, legal). Internal investigation only begins with their consent and in coordination with official services.

Survivor-centred approach. Decisions on follow-up (official complaint, mediation, discreet support) belong to the complainant, not to the project. This rule, central to international good practices, reverses the traditional investigation logic.

Component 4: response to confirmed incidents

When an incident is confirmed, three processes are triggered in parallel.

The support process. The complainant receives medical, psychological and, if relevant, legal support through services mobilised in the preparatory phase. The project finances this support without delay, independently of the investigation outcome.

The disciplinary process. If the perpetrator is a project worker, the internal disciplinary procedure is triggered according to the signed code of conduct, with the stipulated sanctions (warning, suspension, dismissal, reporting to authorities for serious offences).

The judicial process. If the complainant chooses to refer to judicial authorities, the project cooperates fully, within the limits set by applicable law. It neither obstructs nor exerts pressure.

Component 5: monitoring and accountability

A GBV plan only functions if it is monitored with specific indicators.

Process indicators: number of workers who have signed the code of conduct, proportion who have completed induction training, number of awareness sessions held in communities.

Mechanism usage indicators: number of grievances received (without personal details), breakdown by category, average response times.

Outcome indicators: level of satisfaction of mechanism users (via anonymous surveys), return rate to specialised services, follow-up of completed investigations.

These indicators are transmitted to the lender as part of regular E&S reporting, with necessary confidentiality precautions.

Preventing and addressing GBV on an infrastructure construction site is neither a philanthropic cause nor a formal obligation to tick off. It is an essential operational component, on the same level as safety or waste management, which protects people, the project's reputation, and the relationship of trust with lenders and communities.

A functioning GBV plan depends on five simple conditions: early assessment, rule-based prevention, a dedicated grievance mechanism, a structured response to incidents, disciplined monitoring. None of these conditions is revolutionary. Their rigorous implementation, however, separates exemplary projects from projects that end in a publicised crisis.