Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is the NGO Forum on ADB?

A: The NGO Forum on ADB is a network of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) that has been monitoring the projects, programs and policies of the Asian Development Bank since 1992. Forum has been assisting project, program and/or policy-specific campaigns led by network members, and has been conducting capacity building workshops.

NGO Forum on ADB neither accepts money from the ADB nor is it in any way part of it. The Forum Secretariat is based in Quezon City, Philippines

Q: What is the history of NGO Forum on ADB?

A: The NGO Forum on ADB was first established in 1990 as the NGO Working Group on ADB by a coalition of NGOs from the Philippines, Asia and the Pacific, as well as from Europe and USA.

At that time, activists felt that little attention was given to the ADB, which is an influential international financial institution in Asia and the Pacific, as compared with the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Since then, Forum has expanded its core members in each of the five ADB-definced Asian subregions, namely: Central Asia, South Asia, Southeast Asia, Mekong region and the Pacific, as well as in the Bank's major donor countries such as Japan and the US.

Q. What are some activities and campaigns NGO Forum has initiated in the past?

A: Forum has been campaigning for accountability at the ADB resulting in the establishment of the first Inspection Mechanism in 1995 and the New Accountability Mechanism in 2004. It has also been involved in campaigns on gender, safeguards, and disclosure at the ADB, many of which have led to the adoption and/or strengthening of ADB policies.

In addition, Forum has been involved in campaigns on ADB projects such as Highway 1 in Cambodia, Samut Prakarn Wastewater Management Project in Thailand, Chashma Right Bank Irrigation Project in Pakistan and Southern Transport Development Project in Sri Lanka.

Q. How can my organization become a member of NGO Forum? Does my organization have to be a Forum member to participate in Forum activities?

A: In general, Forum only works with its member organizations. Though, there may be exceptions to this rule like for an instance, a non-member organization is seeking assistance for its campaign on a certain policy or project of the ADB.

In order to become a member of NGO Forum on ADB, an organization must meet two criteria:1) the organization must be committed to working on ADB projects/policies; and 2) the organization must not take money or any grant from the ADB. Any organization that meets these two criteria is eligible to become part of the Forum network and may express its intent to do so by contacting the Forum Secretariat.

Q: What is the ADB?

A: The Asian Development Bank (ADB) is a Multilateral Development Bank (MDB) based in Manila, Philippines. Its mandate is to reduce poverty and increase growth in the Asia and the Pacific region. It provides the following services to its member countries: loans, technical assitance, grants, guarantees and equity investment. The Bank is owned by the governments of its 67 member countries (as of June 2007).

Q: How does the ADB provide money for development?

A: There are three basic mechanisms with which the ADB provides development assistance. The first is in the form of grants. Grants comprise a relatively small amount of ADB expenditures and are often given in the form of technical assistances (TAs) which helps borrowing governments plan a particular project and build its capacity for development.

The second of these mechanisms is the concessional loan made through one of the three special funds, the largest of which is the Asian Development Fund (ADF). This is the “soft lending” arm of the ADB -- loans that are given at interest rates well below market levels and on terms more flexible than any commercial bank could provide.

The last is a loan made through the Ordinary Capital Resources (OCR) of the ADB, which functions pretty much like a loan made through a private sector bank, with the borrower repaying at market interest rates in a timely manner. Only countries in some measure of economic hardship are eligible for “soft lending”, while others are only eligible for OCR lending.

Q: Who borrows from the ADB?

A: Unlike private banks, which lend largely to individuals or private companies, the primary borrowers of the ADB are its Developing Member Countries (DMCs). Of the 63 member countries, 40 are DMCs. ADB does have a private sectior lending arm which lends to private companies. However, its private sector portofolio is not very large.

Q: How does the ADB make decisions?

A: The highest decision making body of the ADB is its Board of Governors, consisting primarily of finance ministers from the 63 member countries. The Governors meet once a year at the ADB annual meeting. In the interim, all operational decisions of the ADB are made by its member governments through officials sent to the ADB’s Board of Directors, often from the member government’s ministry of Finance.

Voting power is determined by investment in the ADB. For example, though India has a population of more than one billion, and though it can sometimes account for nearly 15% of all ADB expenditures, it only has 5.439% of the voting power (as of February 2005), reflecting its contributions to the ADB. The 40 DMCs combined account for about 40% of voting power, while the non-borrowing ADB member countries account for the remaining 60%. The largest contributors to the ADB are Japan and the USA, each of whom control 12.942% of voting power.

Q: Who keeps the ADB accountable?

A: As of this moment, it is not possible to take the ADB or any MDB to any judicial system in any country or through the United Nations Framework. That is because these institutions enjoy Judicial Immunity either through international agreement, as in the case of the Bretton Woods Institutions (World Bank and IMF) or through their organizational charter as in the case of the ADB. (Article 50 of the Charter is entitled “Immunity from Judicial Proceedings”.) As a result, it is very difficult to hold the ADB accountable when it violates national laws or internationally accepted norms and declarations, such as those established through the United Nations.

In responce to world-wide concerns over/call for effectivenss of development aid, ADB began adopting a set of policies in 1990's (see below for policies) and a way to ensure its adherence to, or more technicallty "compliance with" these policies, known as Inspection Mechanism, which was approved by BoD in 1995. This mechanism came under critique in 1999, when the government of Thailand refused to allow inspectors to visit the Samut Prakarn Wastewater Management project. More importantly, the ADB’s BoD failed to approve the report of the inspection panel, which concluded ADB's non-compliance with some of its own policies. There was also a growing realization that the Inspection Mechanism focussed primarily on ADB's compliance (or lack thereof) and did not directly address problems faced by affected people. As a result, the ADB revised and renamed its inspection function, now known as the Accountability Mechanism, which has a problem-solving arm in addition to a conventional compliance arm. For more information, see our Accountability Mechanism webpage. It is still the case that the ADB polices itself, though through a more independent and accountable mechanism than prior to 1995.

Q: What is an ADB policy?

A: Despite the historical context wherein policies emerged as guidelines to ensure development effectivenss, this is a question that the ADB asks itself from time to time and does not seem to be clear on. ADB policies are divided into two: business policies, which have to do with the way that the ADB conducts business internally, and Operational Policies (OPs), which have to do with the way ADB conducts its core business. Some examples of OPs include the three safeguard policies, Environment, Resettlement and Indigenous Peoples. From the perspective of Civil Society, OPs are more important as these are the ones to which the ADB can be held accountable through the Accountability Mechanism. Civil Society tends to see policies as guidelines to which the ADB must adhere. In fact, when one reads many ADB policies and strategies, there are very few parts that are explicitly binding for the organization. Instead, the policies often read as a mixture of Best Practice advice and statements of what the ADB hopes it may be able to achieve. There are those within the ADB who would argue that this is what a policy ought to look like. Many in Civil Society disagree, citing that policies are the one thing that can keep the ADB accountable and therefore should be seen as binding rules of one sort or another.

Q: How is the ADB organized?

A: Since its restructuring in 2000, ADB Management is divided into five operational departments, defined by subregion, and the Research and Sustainable Development Department (RSDD). The five subregions are: Central Asia (includes China), South Asia, Greater Mekong Subregion (includes Yunnan Province, China), Southeast Asia, and the Pacific. These are the operational departments of the ADB, wherein most of the projects, programs and lending of the institution occur. The ADB also has an internal think tank/safeguards department known as the Regional and Sustainable Development Department (RSDD). RSDD is already mentioned at the beginning. For more details, see ADB’s organizational chart.

All this can be confusing at times and make it difficult to know where to approach the institution. You best bet should be ADB's resident mission in DMCs (where they exist) and regional representative offices in donor countries (where they exist). They should at least be able to tell who you should contact (including themselves). However, our experiences with resident missions are not always promising.

If you are concerned about a water project in India, for example, your best bet may be to approach that particular project officer, who may be a specialist on Infrastructure or Agriculture, depending on the kind of water project it is. She or he would probably be based in Manila, but be working through ADB staff based in Delhi with the Executing Agency (EA), which would likely be a branch of the local or state government. But there will also be someone who specializes in water based in Manila and who is responsible for working on all South Asia water projects, whereas your project officer may only be working on the one you are following. That person would also be in touch with the water team in RSDD, who are not directly involved in projects, but who are tasked with making sure there is some level of compliance with ADB policies related to water from all ADB projects. The Manila-based NGO Center is another window to ADB for civil society organizations. NGO Center should be able to facilitate your contact with officers directly in charge of your concerns.

If all this seems confusing to you, don’t be put off. The point is that the ADB is a huge and hard to pin down bureaucracy, and it can be hard to pin down. If you need help with a particular campaign or if you have any questions, feel free to contact us.

Q: What do you have against the ADB anyway, especially after 1999 ADB's overarching goal has become poverty reduction of A/P?

A: Because ADB projects are largely implemented by DMC government officials in whose interest it is to appear as the ADB would want them to appear, the ADB often has little clue of what the on-the-ground effects of their projects may be. This is quite damaging, especially when ADB-funded projects/programs are bringing about negative impacts on natural and social environment, on which poor people in A/P so often depend. So one role for Civil Society is as a watchdog to ensure that these realities are conveyed to ADB management, Executive Directors and member governments.

Furthermore, while there can be little doubt that development has benefited people in Asia and the Pacific, we can note two points: a) not all countries and not all people have benefited from development, and those that have done so at the cost of others. In relatively industrialized countries such as Thailand, development for major cities comes at the expense of workers and farmers from Thai villages who are not targeted for the benefits of development. Subsequent urbanization brings with it its own set of problems. As people become urbanized, they may be earning more money and therefore reflect well on the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), but they are often forced into squalid living conditions in slum areas and therefore experience a decrease in their standard of living and an increase in money earned. Following the development model of some Western societies, notably the USA, many countries in Asia have a growing elite class of industrialists and entrepreneurs, as well as a growing under class of those the system has left behind. Therefore, the entire development model promoted by the ADB and similar institutions is fundamentally flawed.

b) ADB-driven development can lead to more direct forms of violence than poverty. In many cases, resettlement has been carried out without the consent of affected peoples with the result that they are in worse conditions than they were before the project was carried out. Rights to water, food, life and livelihood can be and have been endangered by poorly thought out development projects. The players in this scenario are often poles apart in terms of power, with the ADB and the government with its armies and police on one side and impoverished communities often of indigenous people on the other, often with women being the most effected. But the one thing that the effected communities do have is the power of their voices to speak the truth and to demand justice. The Forum network attempts to leverage these voices both to petition ADB and member governments and to bring their plight to international attention.

For more information, you may write to secretariat@forum-adb.org