Climate was absent from the World Bank Group’s Annual Meetings agenda in Bangkok this week, where the institution doubled down on its private capital mobilisation goals and ‘technology neutral’ approach to energy investments.
On day one, President Banga outlined his view of the continuing role for fossil gas in countries’ energy mix, dismissing wind and solar as a “top-up” energy source. The World Bank remains the biggest financier of fossil fuels among the multilateral development banks (MDBs), which have channelled $19billion in direct finance to oil, coal and gas since the Paris Agreement, and much more in indirect finance through private intermediaries and technical or policy assistance. While direct finance for ‘clean’ energy is increasing, it remains elusive for low-income countries and tends to add to debt burdens. Banga’s position in Bangkok left the door open for risky approaches such as nuclear, geothermal and large-scale hydropower, despite what we’ve seen in Nepal.
The Meetings took place in a region beset by energy price shocks and climate impacts, with severe flooding in the most vulnerable areas of Bangkok in the weeks beforehand, and the shadow of the Nepal flood tragedy looming large. As people across Thailand and Asia bear the brunt of the climate and energy crises on a daily basis, this is precisely the moment when these topics should be top of the agenda.
Energy showed up in the Meetings agenda on the last day, as the Bank announced the first ‘Mining Compacts’ aimed at coordinating policy reforms and catalysing investments in the minerals sector in eight countries. These compacts could be an opportunity to strengthen due diligence, safeguards and respect for human rights in this emerging sector, as well as develop value chains to support countries’ development. However, the Bank’s approach eschews just transition principles and ignores the role of communities as rightsholders.
While peoples’ rights were notoriously absent from discussions at the official meeting venue, they were front and centre in the plethora of civil society-led activities taking place across the city. Advocates, activists and affected communities from around the world gathered for a Peoples’ Assembly on debt and development, a Feminist Festival, an Indigenous Peoples’ gathering, countless workshops and exchange spaces, all culminating in a street march alongside local trade unions on the final day.
In the wake of the energy crisis, people in Asia and beyond are looking for reliable, affordable, secure and clean energy. Shifting public finance out of fossil fuels into sustainable renewables is an urgent task. These Meetings were a missed opportunity for the World Bank to act.
Members of the Big Shift Coalition responded:
Sunil Acharya, Recourse: “The World Bank is not moving in the right direction on climate and energy. President Banga’s framing of wind and solar as a ‘top-up’ to nuclear, hydropower and gas misses the opportunity to transform energy systems. Fossil gas is bad economics, it exposes countries to volatile global markets and debt while locking public resources into costly infrastructure. The World Bank must stop reproducing the extractive development model of the fossil fuel era and redirect public finance towards 100% renewable economies that deliver energy for all, protect people and nature, and put people’s priorities before private profit.”
Leandro Gomez, FARN (Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales): “Despite the Bank’s efforts to emphasize that new minerals and metals industries should create development and decent jobs, the presentation of its strategy made it clear that the focus is on mobilizing private capital per se. The energy transition appeared to be sidelined, while local communities’s rights and needs were notably absent. The creation of conditions for mineral extraction was limited to investment requirements, completely disregarding the rights of communities, the environment, and due diligence.”
Emma Beelen, Urgewald: “The World Bank is doubling down on fossil gas despite its obvious role in making communities vulnerable to global supply crises, not to mention its devastating effect for the climate crisis. Its stubborn focus on private capital mobilization ignores the fact that financial intermediary lending by the bank’s private sector arms is poorly regulated, with limited application of environmental and social standards, and big transparency gaps especially for the IFC's $18 billion trade finance portfolio. Improvements to the World Bank’s sustainability standards are badly needed to justify its claims of positive development impact arising from private capital mobilization.”
Ellenor Bartolome, Philippine Movement for Climate Justice: “The World Bank is sleeping through the climate emergency it helped create. Its own climate commitments are gathering dust while communities across the Global South face Super Typhoons, super El Niño, and super tragedies. Holding the Annual Meetings in Bangkok should have been a wake-up call. But from an 80-year-old institution whose legacy is debt, destruction and domination, its silence comes as no surprise. It keeps bankrolling fossil fuels and profiting from them at the expense of our lives. Worse, its own accountability mechanisms are in crisis, and communities harmed by its dirty projects are still denied remedy. All this has left the World Bank with zero credibility. It is time to dismantle this system and build one that serves people and the planet.”
Wentland Muhatiah, ACCESS Coalition: “Mission 300 is the World Bank’s biggest promise to Africa, and in Bangkok we heard the right words about access, affordability and jobs. Yet, the Bank still hasn’t won’t ruled out gas and can’t show how many of the newits celebrated 50 million connections came from new money rather than old projects relabelled. Clean cooking sits at the margins, even though most homes across Sub-Saharan Africa still cook with wood and charcoal. The Bank must should publish where every energy dollar goes, track clean cooking alongside connections, and ring-fence at least 15% of Mission 300 finance for fragile and conflict-affected countries, mostly as grants. Mission 300 should build a market for African-made equipment, so that clean, affordable energy for the people furthest behind becomes Africa’s route to industry and decent work.”
Anja Gebel, Germanwatch: “The World Bank needs to strengthen internal processes and incentives to ensure effective climate support even after dropping its climate financing targets. Otherwise we will see a drop in its climate finance over the next two years. The upcoming evaluation of its Climate Change Action Plan needs to produce results on how to improve climate outcomes, and the Bank needs to speed up in drafting robust impact indicators, especially now that it wants to focus more on ‘output’ than ‘input’ regarding climate finance.”
Smith Nwokocha, Quest For Growth and Development Foundation: “The story of Bonny island in Nigeria’s Niger Delta demonstrates why development finance must be judged not only by economic growth and energy production, but also by its impact on people, livelihoods, rights, and the environment. Communities should not be forced to bear the costs of fossil fuel expansion while the benefits remain unequal. The World Bank Group must move beyond fossil fuel dependence and prioritise renewable energy, industrial decarbonisation, community-led development, and a just transition that protects frontline communities and creates decent jobs for young people. Africa’s development must not come at the expense of its people or its future.”
Jason Weiner, Bank Climate Advocates: “It is unfathomable that the World Bank Group does not require use of best available science and methods to assess and prevent avoidable climate change and other harms prior to its financing decisions. The ‘Good International Industry Practice’ standard for environmental assessments in the antiquated IFC Performance Standards is inadequate and has led to countless harms for communities. Lip service is not good enough. The World Bank Group must update its policies and practices, to use the ‘due diligence harm-prevention standard’ under international law. Specifically, assessment and prevention of environmental and social impacts must be a cornerstone requirement in the upcoming IFC/MIGA Sustainability Framework update.
Fiza Qureshi, Big Shift Global: “It is alarming that the World Bank is wrapping the same old gas finance under the new rhetoric of baseload. Pakistan proves this logic is obsolete. A 51GW consumer-led solar revolution is set to save $6.3 billion and deliver 20% of our electricity, without a single loan dollar for baseload gas, without adding a single penny to public debt. Despite this, new gas funding is surfacing, hidden under trade financing in Pakistan and under IDA and MIGA guarantees for Mission 300 and other LPG projects in Africa. We urge the Bank to invest every single penny into battery storage to make solar affordable, sustainable and available for both electricity and clean cooking.”
Dr. Wafa Misrar, CAN Morocco: “Africa holds some of the world’s greatest renewable energy potential, yet more than 600 million Africans still live without electricity. There is a bitter irony in the World Bank presenting fossil gas as the answer when decades of fossil fuel extraction have deepened energy poverty, debt, dependence and climate vulnerability. Rebranding gas as a ‘transition fuel’ will not deliver the just energy transition Africa needs, one grounded in renewable energy, economic sovereignty, decent jobs and community rights.”
Haneen Shahen, MENAFEM: “We came to the World Bank Annual Meetings because public money should serve our communities and our future. Every dollar invested in gas locks us further into fossil fuel dependence. We’re demanding an end to fossil fuel finance and a shift towards renewable energy that is publicly owned, accessible and just. Bangkok has demonstrated that the Bank is a long way from delivering on this vision.”
Notes
Contacts:
- Sophie Richmond srichmond@climatenetwork.org +447989944234
- Madeleine Race madeleine@re-course.org +447405351150