Principles
Governance and integrity: principles we are prepared to be held to
A programme that will take decades cannot rest on the good intentions of the people who start it. What follows is how Global Cities Development is structured and how it conducts itself — commitments, not credentials.
- 01
Governance, delivery and capital sit in separate legal entities
The three functions of a city-scale programme are not combined in one company. Long-term stewardship, the delivery of works and the provision of capital are held by different legal entities, each with its own board, its own obligations and its own financing.
The purpose is traceable accountability. When a decision is questioned, it is clear which entity took it and under which mandate — and no party can rely on its position in one function to direct another.
- 02
An independent custodial foundation sits at the top of the structure
Ultimate control of a programme rests with a custodial foundation rather than with an operating company or an investor. A foundation has no shareholders to distribute to and a purpose fixed in its constitution, which is what allows it to carry an obligation that outlasts any single commercial party.
Global Cities Development Limited is itself wholly owned by such a foundation. The same principle is applied to the programmes we structure.
- 03
We disclose our ultimate beneficial owners to counterparties
Governments, development finance institutions and banks are entitled to know who stands behind the entity they are dealing with. We disclose our ultimate beneficial ownership and our group structure to counterparties on request, and we expect the same of the parties we contract with.
A party that will not say who owns it does not become a counterparty of ours.
- 04
We screen the parties we work with
Before we enter into an engagement we screen the counterparty, its owners and its controlling individuals against applicable sanctions regimes and for politically exposed person status, and we repeat that screening over the life of the relationship.
Where screening raises a question we cannot resolve, we do not proceed. This applies to investors and intermediaries as well as to suppliers.
- 05
Zero tolerance of bribery, and no fees contingent on public decisions
We do not offer, promise, give or accept any improper payment or advantage, directly or through a third party, and we do not use intermediaries to do what we would not do ourselves.
We do not accept or pay success fees, commissions or other remuneration that is contingent on a decision of a public authority — an approval, a licence, a land allocation or an award. A fee that depends on how an official decides creates a reason to influence that decision, and we will not hold one.
- 06
Programmes are designed to meet development finance standards
We design programmes to meet the environmental and social standards applied by development finance institutions, such as the IFC Performance Standards.
This is a design requirement we set for ourselves, not a certification, an accreditation or a statement that any institution has reviewed or approved a programme of ours. The consequence is practical: environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA), stakeholder engagement, land and resettlement questions and grievance arrangements are treated as part of structuring a programme rather than as later compliance work.
- 07
We respect public procurement procedures
Where a host government has a procurement procedure, that procedure is the route. We do not seek to have it set aside, shortened or awarded around, and we do not treat access to officials as a substitute for it.
Our work sits upstream of procurement: establishing the mandate, the legal framework and the structure within which a government can run its own process properly.
Crosscutting
Sustainability and climate resilience are not a sector
Sustainability is not one of the ten sectors a city programme is delivered through. It is a condition applied across all of them, because the decisions that determine whether a city is habitable in fifty years are taken at the beginning — in the land-use plan, the water balance, the energy mix and the level at which infrastructure is built.
In practice this means climate risk is assessed before a master plan is fixed rather than after; that water, energy and waste are treated as one resource system rather than three procurements; and that the standard applied is the one a development finance institution would apply, whether or not such an institution is involved. Each sector page states how the principle applies to that sector.
These are the principles on which Clear City, the company's programme in preparation, is being structured. They are requirements we set for ourselves, not a statement that any institution has reviewed that programme.
Questions
Due diligence enquiries
Governments, development finance institutions and prospective counterparties who need corporate, ownership or compliance information for their own due diligence should write to us. Our corporate particulars are published on the About page, and contact addresses are on the Contact page.