PROTOCOL P-07 | Pre-Engagement Diagnostics

Reputational Risk Briefing Protocol

TRIGGER When entering a community with documented prior project history, known reputational spillover, or communities where other developer projects have caused harm

STEPS

1. Complete the Conflict History Scan for the project area

Before preparing any briefing, gather documented information: prior projects, their outcomes, any unresolved community grievances, and any actors or organizations associated with negative experiences.

2. Assess which reputational risks are directly inherited

Identify the specific risk categories: (a) spillover from other developers (communities associate all developers with prior harm); (b) institutional distrust (communities have negative experiences with government or regulatory agencies); (c) specific topic sensitivity (land, fishing grounds, water, environmental damage); (d) broken commitments from previous engagement processes.

3. Draft a Reputational Risk Briefing for all actors engaging with the community

The briefing should cover: what happened, when, which groups were affected, what remains unresolved, and how the current project should approach each sensitive area. It should be plain-language, specific, and actionable, not a general history lesson.

4. Deliver the briefing to all team members before any community contact

This includes ComRel officers, technical staff, contractors, and LGU liaisons. Ensure all actors understand: what not to say, how to respond to questions about prior projects, and what signals of inherited distrust look like.

5. Design the engagement approach to actively address inherited distrust

This may mean: explicitly acknowledging prior experiences in early conversations; creating space for communities to express concerns about the current project in light of prior ones; taking a slower, more listening-focused approach to early engagement; and being transparent about how this project differs from prior ones.

6. Update the briefing as new information emerges during engagement

Communities often reveal historical grievances gradually, not all at once. Update the briefing when new information emerges and re-brief the team.

PURPOSE

To ensure all project actors are briefed on conflict history and prior community experiences before engaging, so that engagement is designed to account for inherited distrust, unresolved grievances, and reputational risks the current project did not create but must navigate. Not doing this is equivalent to entering a community blind.

Roles and Responsibilities

Primary:

Actor: ComRel Officer / PCO
Responsibility: Conducts the conflict history research, drafts the briefing, and delivers it to the team.

Supporting:

Actor: Local CSO / Community Informant
Responsibility: Provides local knowledge of prior projects and community experiences that may not be in official records.

Receives Briefing:

Actor: All actors engaging with communities
Responsibility: All must receive and confirm understanding of the briefing before community contact (ComRel officers, technical staff, contractors, LGU liaisons).

Field Notes and Adaptation Guidance

• Field Note — Reputational spillover is not irrational

  Communities that are cautious, guarded, or skeptical at the start of a new project are not being unreasonable, they are applying lessons learned from prior experience. Treating inherited distrust as an obstacle to overcome, rather than a condition to understand and address, is one of the most common failures in new project engagement.

• Field Note — Prior broken commitments require explicit acknowledgement

  Where prior commitments were made and not kept (by any actor, not only the current developer) communities benefit from explicit acknowledgement that this is known and that this project has a different approach. Silence about known history is interpreted as evasion. Acknowledgement is not admission of liability — it is a sign of awareness.

• Adaptation Guidance

  In areas where multiple renewable energy projects have entered the same communities in rapid succession, consider holding a joint listening session before any project-specific engagement begins: 'Before we tell you about our project, we want to understand your experiences with prior projects.' This resets the entry dynamic and signals genuine interest in community perspective.

Required Output / Documentation

• Reputational Risk Briefing document (on file, updated as needed)

• Team sign-off or confirmation that the briefing has been received

• Engagement plan section noting which inherited risks are being addressed and how