Search Results

Special Publications বিশেষ প্রকাশনা সম্পদ ব্যাঙ্কওয়াচ | বার্ষিক প্রতিবেদন | প্রকল্প সংক্ষিপ্ত | গাইড বই বিপজ্জনক distractions কোন ক্ষতি করোনা অন্ধকারে Regional Overview of Country Safeguard Systems to Mitigate Trans boundary Infrastructure Mega Project Impacts : Mongolia Regional Overview of Country Safeguard Systems to Mitigate Trans boundary Infrastructure Mega Project Impacts : Indonesia Regional Overview of Country Safeguard Systems to Mitigate Trans boundary Infrastructure Mega Project Impacts : Myanmar Regional Overview of Country Safeguard Systems to Mitigate Trans boundary Infrastructure Mega Project Impacts : South Asia and Sri Lanka Assessment of the ADB’s Energy Policy: Undermining International Climate Commitments ◄ 1 / 1 ► Please reload 2nd AIIB ESS Critique AIIB Energy Strategy Critique RISK AND RESILIENCE: Mainstreaming Climate Change Into the Environmental Impact Assessment Process The ADB in Burma: Behind the Scenes Roads to Destruction ADB’s Contradictory Roads, Biodiversity and Plantations Activities in Lao PDR or How Did You Know We Wanted Ecocide? ◄ 1 / 1 ► Please reload

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. প্রজেক্ট মনিটরিং Latest News Sign the 1M Petition ADB Project Tracker Media NGO Forum on ADB questions ADB’s intent to shift towards using country safeguards systems without any ‘assessment’ and ‘equivalency’ with its own safeguards systems as presented by the Strategy and Policy Department of the ADB. This alarming move towards using country systems prematurely will have disastrous impacts on local communities and the environment especially in autocratic regimes where civil society voice is suppressed and persecuted, and national instruments are riddled with corruption and weak implementation. ADB in doing so will also be in violation of its own ADB Safeguards Policy Strategy SPS 2010, where it clearly indicates ‘equivalency’ and ‘assessment’ to be conducted for Country Systems with ADB standards before they are considered for use in any ADB project. In ADB’s own study on Country Systems in 2015, it indicates that in six upper-middle-income countries UMICs, the use of country systems are not feasible as they are far from ADB SPS 2010 standards. The ADB is faced to provide competitive lending rates with the rise of new banks and abruptly moving towards using Country Systems is a way by which the Bank is trying to reduce loan approval times and “costs” by compromising due diligence requirements which put human rights, public safety, environmental sustainability and national economies at risk. Read the Strategy 2030 related documents below : 21 Aug 2018 | Pillars for the Future of Development Finance in Asia 08 May 2018 | Joint Submission of Comments on ADB’s Draft Strategy 2030 02 Feb 2017 | ADB Strat 2030 Letter 29 Mar 2017 | ADB response to letter regarding ADB's new corporate strategy 30 Jun 2016 | ADB criticized for holding questionable consultations on its new corporate strategy এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংক (এডিবি) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030

PAKISTAN BANGLADESH INDIA INDONESIA PHILIPPINES বাংলাদেশ বাংলাদেশ সূত্র: বাংলাদেশ: কোভিড-১৯ অ্যাক্টিভ রেসপন্স অ্যান্ড এক্সপেন্ডিচার সাপোর্ট প্রোগ্রাম LATEST NEWS Read the latest COVID-19 Research produced by Coastal Livelihood and Environmental Action Network (CLEAN) and Change Initiatives in Bangladesh Download UPDATES 22 January 2022 Bangladesh to approach ADB for $940m in fresh aid 29 November 2021 ADB extends $150 million loan to help small enterprises to recover 18 November 2021 $150m ADB loan to support Covid-hit small enterprises in Bangladesh 3 November 2021 AIIB to extend $250 million loan for economic recovery 24 September 2021 ADB Approves $250 Million Loan for Bangladesh Economic Recovery Program 26 June 2021 ADB Approves $940 Million for Bangladesh COVID-19 Vaccines WEBINAR SERIES: BANGLADESH Hasan Mehedi from CLEAN (Coastal Livelihood and Environmental Action Network), Bangladesh shares the findings of the research ‘Country Assessment Report on COVID-19 recovery loans provided by Bilateral and Multilateral Financial Institution in Bangladesh’. The research aims to revitalize Governance and Public Interest in the COVID19 Recovery External Debts provided by International Financial Institutes (IFIs).

সম্পদ 2022 December Special Issue September June Marc h 2021 December September June March 2020 ডিসেম্বর সেপ্টেম্বর জুন মার্চ 2019 ডিসেম্বর সেপ্টেম্বর জুন মার্চ একটি পুরানো Bankwatch সমস্যা খুঁজছেন? সচিবালয়ে [at]forum-adb.org-এ একটি কপির জন্য জিজ্ঞাসা করুন।

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. প্রজেক্ট মনিটরিং Latest News Sign the 1M Petition ADB Project Tracker Media WATCH Unpacking the Delivery of ADB’s Safeguard Policy Statement 8 May 2019 | Nadi, Fiji এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংক (এডিবি) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030

Explore ADB Safeguard Violations in Energy Projects This interactive page provides a visual overview of safeguard violations linked to ADB–funded energy projects in South Asia. How to use this dashboard? Click on any item—such as a country, safeguard category, or type of violation—to view detailed project information and related issues. Click the same item again to return to the full regional overview. Use the filters and visual tools to explore where and how safeguard breaches have occurred in ADB’s energy portfolio across South Asia. ADB Energy Investments In South Asia Next

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. প্রজেক্ট মনিটরিং Latest News Sign the 1M Petition ADB Project Tracker Media NGO Forum on ADB Comments: Safeguard Compliance and Accountability Mechanism Framework for Investments Supported by Financial Intermediaries In Forum’s experience, there are several fundamental problems in ensuring FI Accountability to Safeguards – Project cycle bound timely release of project information in a meaningful manner for local peoples FIs need to ensure that environmental and social due diligence is implemented at the highest standards by their clients On issues of non-compliance, an independent and responsive redress mechanism has to be in place to ensure remedy for affected peoples. Keeping these three principles in mind the following comments have been made to the AMF- In the introductory section of the AMF, the lack of implementation of Equator Principles has been cited as a clear gap in FI accountability. We would recommend that the shift from guidelines for FIs to binding requirements should be emphasized in this section to strengthen the conceptual framework for this AMF. In line with comments from Accountability Counsel, we re-echo the need for learning to be upfront in this document for the AMF (Section 12, pg 4). For the AMF to work effectively it has to be able to learn from each case and make the necessary reforms to strengthen implementation. The issue of lessons learned and feedback loops built into the AMF system to help reform the structure will be critical to bringing diverse types of FI’s to compliance. On the issue of FI Sub-project categorization (pg.8) there is a need to ensure that a comprehensive ESIA is conducted to ensure the ‘Big B’ Category projects are deemed Category A. This is a potential risk especially for Infrastructure Funds, examples can be drawn from the Emerging Asia Fund of the AIIB and IFC, which has been tapped by Summit Power Group to retrofit several coal plants and build 4 new power generation facilities, which are fossil fuel based. The impacts from these projects will be long term and immediate and will require comprehensive ESIAs to ensure Safeguards are implemented. FIs and there parent funding institutions such as commercial banks and multilateral banks should have a strict monitoring role over their clients on environmental and social due diligence. The current practice of client-led safeguarding and self- reporting is no longer a viable model to ensure that AMF objectives are reached, thus we strongly recommend that monitoring and evaluation roles by FIs and their parent financial institutional investors should have an overseeing function. This is maybe done through further elaborating on a governance framework for FIs and their FI Clients, with detailed monitoring requirements in place. We are noticing for both ADB and AIIB projects that the Grievance Redress Mechanisms are often not effective at the local level. For MDBs it has been a real challenge to ensure that local GRMs have worked effectively; this will be a bigger challenge for an FI client to ensure. In this case, we recommend that project level GRMs should be – Meaningfully accessible for local communities Ensure complainants protection from backlash and retaliation Ensure remedial response The paper recognizes the shortcomings of GRMs - "However, GRMs are often poorly designed or implemented, and thus create mistrust and conflict between communities and the project executing agency. Finally, it must be noted that project-level GRM is not a substitute for an accountability mechanism at the institutional (financial intermediary) level, because the GRM cannot determine whether the financial intermediary has complied with its own environmental and social policies, standards, and procedures." Thus it has to be explicitly stated that accessing local GRMs should not be made a pre- requisite for local communities to trigger the Accountability Mechanism for an FI project. As mentioned earlier the fundamental problem with FI non-compliance to Safeguards is the lack of Time Bound Disclosure of project information to local people. At present local communities have no way of assessing whether FI subprojects are indeed FIs and what policies and mechanisms are entailed in their operations. From a community perspective, the following information has to be provided pre-project approval – Area and scale of the project Clear description of project cycle, construction, environmental and social impacts Clear assessment of project benefits sharing, compensations and allocations Clear understanding on rights, privileges and redress mechanisms for communities in cases of violations. All of language needs and ensuring that poor and vulnerable groups such as women, children and people with disabilities are made aware of all project related information. This is where the governance structure of this AMF will prove to be critical to ensure that Clients are complying with the disclosure needs at the local level. Provisions should also be made upstream in the project cycle to ensure that information disclosure needs are all met before a project is approved for implementation. The Forum re-echos Accountability Counsels recommendation on following the best practice example from the Green Climate Fund - which works with FIs, or accredited entities – The GCF has adopted a high degree of disclosure in line with international best practice, including time-bound disclosure of crucial project information – such as environmental and social impact assessments – ahead of approval. The degree and timing of disclosure are calibrated according to the risk profile of the investment: with more and better disclosure for the highest risk (Category A). The following excerpts from its 2016 Information Disclosure Policy describe the degree of disclosure: “Environmental and social reports. With respect to the project and program funding proposals that have an environmental or social impact, the Accredited Entities (AE’s) shall disclose and announce to the public and, via the Secretariat, to the Board and Active Observers: in case of Category A projects, the Environmental and Social Impacts Assessment (ESIA) and an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) at least 120 days in advance of the AE’s or GCF’s Board decision, whichever is earlier; in the case of Category I-1 programs, the Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS)2 at least 120 days in advance of the AE’s or GCF’s Board decision, whichever is earlier; in the case of Category B projects, the ESIA3 and an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP)4 at least 30 days in advance of the AE’s or GCF’s Board decision, whichever is earlier; and in the case of Category I-2 programs, the ESMS at least 30 days in advance of the AE’s or GCF’s Board decision, whichever is earlier.” The Forum recognizes the independence embedded in the structure proposed in this AMF and would make the following recommendations on the mechanism proposed- In the submission of a complaint, there should be a provision for complaints to be filed by international and regional representatives as authorized representatives for local and in-country representatives who are unable to step forward due to security risk and conflict scenarios. In cases where the IRM has proved that there have been issues on non-compliance, then all consultations between the client and the community MUST have the IRM present to ensure power equity in information exchange. This has to be an integral part of ensuring that a complaint process and remedial action are done objectively. In it’s entirety this AMF is an innovative and needed effort in holding FIs accountable. এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংক (এডিবি) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. প্রজেক্ট মনিটরিং Latest News Sign the 1M Petition ADB Project Tracker Media 2009 after the approval of the new ADB’s Accountability Mechanism (AM) was approved in December 2003, replacing the 1995 Inspection Function. Although a review of the policy was scheduled in 2006, it was postponed until 2008 and later rescheduled. The ADB officially started its policy review when ADB President Haruhiko Kuroda made an announcement during its Annual Meeting in Tashkent in May 2010. The ADB conducted a series of multi-stakeholder consultations in Asia, Europe, and the United States from September to November 2010. It also held consultations with affected people in selected countries. In April 2011, Forum submitted its comments on the consultation draft policy paper. Civil society organizations, however, criticized the ADB for coming up with a draft Working Paper–a draft policy version submitted to the ADB Board of Directors for review–two days after the deadline for submission of public comments on the consultation draft policy paper. In May 2011, after Forum’s continuous pushing and lobbying, the bank decided to put the review process on the right track by inviting public comments on the draft Working Paper. In June 2011, Forum submitted its comments on the first Working-Paper. In July, ADB released its second Working-Paper which is currently open for public comments. Forum members have been using the AM to register local communities’ complaints on the Bank’s lapses in terms of its policies, programs, and projects. While there was not a single complaint filed in 2008, out of the 13 cases in 2009, four of which were filed by Forum members. Accountability mechanism related documents - 21 Oct 2019 | NGO Forum on ADB Comments: Safeguard Compliance and Accountability Mechanism Framework 17 Mar 2019 | ADB’s 10 years of Accountability Mechanism is not worth celebrating 17 Jan 2019 | Does ADB's Accountability mechanism work? 14 Nov 2010 | Review on Accountability Greater Mekong Subregion: Mekong Tourism Development Project 14 Nov 2010 | Holding ADB Accountable: A look at the Present Accountability Mechanism 14 Nov 2010 | Review on Accountability Mechanism Sixth Road Project: Not Eligible 12 Nov 2010 | Accountability Counsel Comments on the Asian Development Bank Accountability Mechanism Policy Review 14 Sep 2010 | Submission to the Accountability Mechanism Review 09 Sep 2010 | Effectiveness of the Accountability Mechanism in Central Asia and the Caucasus এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংক (এডিবি) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030

ADB Energy Policy Review Scorecard Why This Matters This year marks a decade since the Paris Agreement — yet the Asian Development Bank (ADB) still falls short of the 1.5°C goal. ADB’s Energy Policy Review proposes dangerous rollbacks, including: Reviving extractive industries Lifting the ban on nuclear energy investments Promoting co-firing and other false “transition” technologies Keeping loopholes for coal and gas As the world nears a climate tipping point, ADB continues to lag behind its own claims as a “climate bank.” What’s ADB’s Score? That’s for you to decide. Each Forum network member and ally can grade ADB’s Energy Policy Review process and proposed revisions based on their alignment with real climate action — or lack thereof. How to Participate Download the Score you give ADB in the Scorecard drive . Grade ADB’s performance on its Energy Policy Review and proposed revisions. Post your score publicly with any of these hashtags - #ADBFailingDClimateTest #ADBFossilFail #ADBClimateScore Tag ADB Facebook: Asian Development Bank X (Twitter): @ADB_HQ LinkedIn: Asian Development Bank Explain your score in one line. Example: “We give ADB a failing grade for pushing fossil fuels.” Let us know if your organization is joining so we can amplify your post. If you don’t have social media, NGO Forum on ADB can post your score on your behalf, with full credit to your organization. Need Help? If your schedule is tight, fill out this short form and we’ll prepare and post your materials for you — all you have to do is share. You can also check the Scorecard meanings below - Here is an example -

Explore how communities and civil society organizations engage with the AIIB’s Project-affected People’s Mechanism (PPM), with analysis from NGO Forum on ADB highlighting gaps in accessibility, transparency, and accountability in addressing project-related harms. এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংক (এডিবি) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Project-affected People's Mechanism (PPM) AIIB Annual Meeting প্রজেক্ট মনিটরিং The AIIB Project-affected People’s Mechanism (PPM) was established as the bank’s accountability framework to address complaints from communities harmed by AIIB-financed projects, aiming to provide redress and uphold the bank’s Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) commitments. However, civil society organizations have raised serious concerns about its accessibility, independence, and effectiveness. Since its inception in 2019, only a handful of cases have been formally registered—most notably, the 2022 complaint filed by CLEAN and the NGO Forum on ADB regarding the Bhola IPP project in Bangladesh, which alleged coerced land acquisition, environmental damage, and lack of consultation (CLEAN & Forum on ADB, 2022). Critics argue that procedural barriers—such as the requirement to exhaust project-level grievance mechanisms first—and vague timelines for response undermine the PPM’s credibility (Urgewald, 2023). Furthermore, the PPM is structurally embedded within AIIB’s management, raising doubts about its independence compared to more autonomous accountability mechanisms at institutions like the ADB or World Bank (Recourse, 2022). As AIIB expands its project portfolio, particularly in sectors like fossil gas, large hydro, and waste-to-energy, civil society advocates urge the bank to reform the PPM to ensure it can meaningfully serve communities affected by harmful infrastructure and to strengthen enforcement of safeguard violations, not merely mediate them. References: CLEAN & Forum on ADB. (2022). Formal complaint to AIIB on Bhola IPP project. https://www.forum-adb.org Recourse. (2022). Accountability in Multilateral Development Banks: Comparative Analysis. https://www.re-course.org Urgewald. (2023). AIIB Watch: North Dhaka Waste-to-Energy. https://www.urgewald.org FAQs on AIIB's PPM What is the PPM? The PPM is the AIIB’s accountability mechanism, created to address complaints from individuals or communities who believe they have been adversely affected by an AIIB-financed project. It is designed to uphold the bank’s Environmental and Social Framework (ESF). Who can file a complaint? Any two or more affected individuals (or their representative) who believe that an AIIB project has caused them harm related to environmental or social issues may submit a complaint to the PPM. What issues can the PPM investigate? The PPM can examine whether AIIB has failed to follow its own Environmental and Social Policy, leading to harm. It does not address corruption, procurement disputes, or policy disagreements. Is it independent of AIIB management? This is a point of contention. While the PPM is technically separate from project operations, it is structurally housed within AIIB’s management, unlike more independent mechanisms at other multilateral banks (Recourse, 2022). What’s the process for submitting a complaint? Complainants must first attempt to resolve issues through the Project-level Grievance Redress Mechanism (GRM). If unresolved, they can then file a request for compliance review or problem-solving with the PPM. Are there any real examples of PPM complaints? Yes. In 2022, civil society groups CLEAN and Forum on ADB filed the first known complaint against the Bhola IPP gas plant in Bangladesh, citing coerced land acquisition, waterlogging, and a lack of meaningful consultation (CLEAN & Forum on ADB, 2022). What are the limitations of the PPM? Civil society organizations have raised several concerns: Difficult access and awareness for affected communities Delays and vague response timelines Requirement to first exhaust local remedies Lack of structural independence from AIIB Outcomes that may lack enforcement power What reforms are being demanded? Forumnetwork call for the PPM to be: More independent from AIIB management Easier to access for marginalized communities More transparent, with timely responses Able to enforce remedies and monitor compliance Read - NGO Forum on ADB’s Comments on the AIIB Project-affected People's Mechanism (PPM) Civil Society Open Letter to IAMNet - A Call to Defend the Independence of IAMs NGO Forum on ADB Joint Submission, AIIB ESF Review Phase 2 NGO Forum on ADB, AIIB ESF Review Phase 1 Input Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank’s (AIIB) Paper on the Accountability Framework

Explore the timeline of NGO Forum on ADB, highlighting key milestones, advocacy efforts, and achievements in promoting accountability, sustainability, and social justice in ADB and AIIB operations. Based in Quezon City, the Forum has been a leading voice for civil society since 1992. বছরের পর বছর ধরে এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 1991 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 1994 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 1997 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 2000 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 2004 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 2008 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 2011 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 2016 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 2018 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 2020 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 2022 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর। এডিবিতে এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-তে এনজিও ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ (NWG) হিসেবে প্রথম প্রতিষ্ঠিত হয়। 2023 1988 Asian NGO Coalition for Agrarian Reform and Rural Development (ANGOC) এবং এনভায়রনমেন্টাল পলিসি ইনস্টিটিউট (ইপিআই) অংশীদারিত্বের ঠিকানায় প্রবেশ করেছে বহুপাক্ষিক উন্নয়ন ব্যাংক (MDB) সম্পর্কিত বিষয়, ফোকাস করে এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংকের (এডিবি) উপর।

The Sandra Smithey Community Emergency Fund is established in honor of Sandra Smithey. Sandra was the Former Program Officer of the Mott Foundation and the Director of Programs and Philanthropic Engagement at Shine Campaign. Sandra inspired the Forum network members to make a difference in the world. She was a force of nature, ensuring that advocacies about the environment, climate, and human rights were advanced. The fund will be used for emergency relief and distributed to project-affected communities through the Forum network member organizations. For Bank donations - NAME OF BANK : BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS ADDRESS : 114 KALAYAAN AVENUE, DILIMAN, QUEZON CITY, PHILIPPINES ACCOUNT NAME : NGO FORUM ON ADB, INC. FOR USD : 1994-0097-84 | FOR EU : 1994-0551-31 FOR PHP : 1991-0039-12 SWIFT CODE : BOPIPHMM BENEFICIARY ADDRESS : 85-A Masikap Extension, Barangay Central, Quezon City 1100, Philippines BENEFICIARY CONTACT NUMBER : +63 2 84361858 | +63 2 89214412 Please email us a copy of the deposit slip or bank transaction slip for transparency purposes. and updates. You may send it to secretariat [at] forum-adb.org.