Both ENDS
A letter written by Both ENDS, co-signed by 350.org, Australia, Urgewald, Germany, Green Alternative, Georgia, and others, with comments to the AIIB's Energy Strategy Issues note. This strategy prioritizes large scale energy infrastructure, which fails to meet the energy needs of local communities.
The AIIB has the opportunity to champion financing green energy systems for future generations by leapfrogging the large energy infrastructure that rely on fossil fuels, plantations for biomass or dams.
Both ENDS co-wrote a Joint CSO Submission on the Draft Revised Version of the EIB Transparency Policy to the EIB. The transparency policy does not adequately reflect key international standards and principles regarding transparency, as set out in the Global Transparency Initiative's Transparency Charter for International Financial Institutions.
The policy should meet the nine key principles as set out in the Global Transparency Initiative's Transparency Charter for International Financial Institutions, namely: 1) the right of access,; 2) automatic disclosure,; 3) access to decision-making; 4) the right to request information; 5) limited exceptions; 6) appeals; 7) whistleblower protection; 8) the promotion of freedom of information; and 9) regular review.
Political Cafe in the Bank We Trust: Testing the water
How can the right to water and sanitation enhance the World Bank's policy and practice in the sector?
Thursday October 9th, 2008 / 5 pm to 6.45 pm
Overflow room for Preston Auditorium, World Bank, 1818 H Street NW Washington D.C
Last June, President Obama called upon the national and international community to give no more public support to foreign coal. Shortly after this, the World Bank and the European Investment Bank EIB followed the example, setting stricter criteria for loans to energy companies, which will make it nuch more difficult, if not impossible for new coal plants to get financing from these banks.
Infrastructure has become a buzzword of the current development debate. But will the recent infrastructure strategies of the World Bank and the G20, which favour large centralized projects, address the needs of the poor? This is the central question in International Rivers' report "Infrastructure for whom?". Strategic infrastructure projects such as large dams and transport corridors promoted by the World Bank and G20 are funded with public money. In order to make these projects attractive to private investors, they are supported by public guarantee schemes. One of the examples mentioned in the report is the Grand Inga Dam in the Congo River (DRC) which - if ever realised - would be the largest dam in the world.
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the World Bank will donate $23 million to the Philippines, but will also provide a loan of $500 million to this country for the reconstruction of the areas damaged by the storm. According to ‘NGO Forum on ADB,’ Both ENDS’ partner organisation, these banks abuse this crisis. The debt will have to be repaid with interest and Philippine society will end up paying the price.
Ten years after the start of the construction of the Nam Theun 2 dam in Central Laos, it is clear that this mega project has disastrous impacts on people and their environment. The project - originally the flagship of the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the European Investment Bank (EIB) - did not achieve its intended development goals. In a press release which was sent out this week, Both ENDS and partner organisations call on these multilateral banks to withdraw from large scale hydro dams such as Nam Theun 2. The dam, which became operational in 2010, has profound negative effects on local communities, while they do not benefit from it.
