20 November 2009
The Bank is under fire for failing to focus on low-income countries in its lending, and concentrating instead on the demands of rich and middle-income countries.
With much awaited climate talks in Copenhagen in December, the World Bank and its supporters are positioning the institution to play a significant, if not dominant, role in future climate finance.
As the World Bank prepares to revise its energy strategy, Oliver Johnson of the Sussex Energy Group (Science and Technology Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex), reviews the Bank's chequered history in this sector. The conflicting agendas for energy are drawn out, and principles suggested to guide the Bank's support for low-carbon development.
'Development' has become synonymous with destruction in Bangladesh as many of the so-called development projects, financed mainly by the International Financial Institutions (IFIs), have huge negative impacts on the ground. They have added to the global north's 'ecological debt', which must now be repaid.
Official ambitions for reform of World Bank governance remain limited, while the Zedillo Commission calls for far-reaching change. At the IMF, aside from small shifts in voting share, details of further quota reform are notably absent.
As the International Finance Corporation, the private sector arm of the World Bank, announces plans to increase investment in agribusiness by up to 30 per cent in the next three years, NGO reports shed light on the IFC's role in 'land grabs' and flaws in its approach to the food crisis.
Hot on the heels of the start of its energy strategy review the Bank has launched a review of its 2001 environment strategy but continues to come under fire over its green record.
As the Bank seeks to position itself as the vehicle of choice for future climate finance, the experience of the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) calls its competence into question.
World Bank's record in Bangladesh shows there is no place for it in a just response to climate change, but it is set to dominate the new fund for adaptation in Bangladesh. Civil society critics speak out.
The World Bank currently plays four different roles in arrangements to distribute finance for mitigation and adaptation to climate change in developing countries. In addition, its overall lending portfolio can have significant environmental impacts.
As academia and NGOs call for reform of the international financial architecture, the international monetary system is the focus of scrutiny. Support for capital controls and a financial transaction tax has met resistance from the IMF.
The financial crisis has divided perceptions within the IFIs about the role of the financial sector in development. While some parts of the World Bank and IMF highlight the merits of small banks, others continue to push globalised finance.
The World Bank's draft disclosure policy, published in October, marks a significant step forward in Bank transparency but has been criticised for excluding key information from public access.
The debate over IMF conditionality heats up as data comes in about IMF programmes; economic turmoil continues in countries such as Latvia and Ukraine, which face stern IMF demands.
At the 80th anniversary of the World Bank and IMF, global civil society must maintain pressure on the Brazilian and South African G20 presidencies to ensure the forth Financing for Development Conference in 2025 results in urgently required international financial architecture reform.
Multilateral development banks can reduce their dependence on hard currency lending and make local currency financing a central element of their developmental mandate.
