Both ENDS
The Netherlands is a major player in the global water sector, but our investments can quite often lead to human rights violations and environmental problems in the countries where they are made. What can a new Dutch government do to reduce the Netherlands’ footprint beyond our borders? Ellen Mangnus spoke to various experts about this issue: today, part 3.
Friday 20 November 2009 - 17h30 - 19h30 - Het Nutshuis - The Hague.
A new global climate treaty, which aims to counteract further global warming, is set for December. The European Union is said to have great ambitions for this climate summit in Copenhagen. However EU member states, such as the Netherlands, annually invest billions of euros through the European Investment Bank (EIB) in environmentally unfriendly industries, like oil, gas and mining, in developing countries. How can the Netherlands achieve its sustainable goals and incorporate climate considerations into its investment decisions?
The World Bank, an institution that aspires to achieve global sustainable development, now wants to position itself as an environmental bank. This role does not seem like a natural fit and is inconsistent with the implementation of its policies. So, for example, its climate investment funds' criteria are not ambitious enough to realise a transition to (real) renewable energy.
Both ENDS, SOMO, Oxfam Novib and Recourse sent in a submission to FMO's public consultation on its Position Statement on Financial Intermediaries. In this position statement, FMO only takes limited responsibility for the consequences of its investments through so-called financial intermediaries. We call upon FMO to publish a position statement that focuses on protecting human rights and the environment and take full responsibility for this.
Both ENDS calls on the government only to provide export credit insurance to sustainable projects that cause no social and/or environmental damage in the countries where they take place.
On 29 September 2026, Both ENDS lodged the first complaint on climate grounds with the European Commission's Single Entry Point. It asks the Commission to examine whether Aotearoa New Zealand has broken two promises both sides made in the EU-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement: not to weaken or set aside environmental laws in order to encourage trade or investment, and to effectively implement the Paris Agreement.
