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 Southeast Asia Next

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. কৌশলগত পরিকল্পনা 2020 ADB-এর এনজিও ফোরাম তার "কৌশলগত প্রচারণার রোডম্যাপ 2014-2020: দীর্ঘস্থায়ী এবং পদ্ধতিগত পরিবর্তনের দিকে" বাস্তবায়ন করতে প্রস্তুত। পরের ছয় বছরে ফোরাম ADB-এর মধ্যে পদ্ধতিগত পরিবর্তন কার্যকর করার চেষ্টা করবে এবং এর ক্লায়েন্টদের সম্প্রসারণ করে যাতে তারা এশীয় সম্প্রদায়ের উন্নয়নমূলক চাহিদা এবং স্থানীয় প্রেক্ষাপটের প্রতি আরও বেশি দায়বদ্ধতার সাথে সাড়া দেয়। ক্ষতিগ্রস্ত ব্যক্তিদের পক্ষে, যাদের দুর্বলতা এডিবি-র তির্যক উন্নয়ন এজেন্ডা দ্বারা বৃদ্ধি পেয়েছে। ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপ এবং সদস্য সংস্থাগুলির জন্য একটি কেন্দ্রবিন্দু দরিদ্র, মহিলা, জাতিগত গোষ্ঠী এবং প্রান্তিক খাতের কণ্ঠস্বর এবং ক্ষমতাকে শক্তিশালী করছে। পরিকল্পনা প্রক্রিয়া ফোরামটি তার কাঠামো, প্রচারাভিযানের পরিকল্পনা এবং সাংগঠনিক নকশার উপর কৌশলীকরণ শুরু করে ডিসেম্বর 2012 সালে থাইল্যান্ডের ব্যাংককে একটি প্রস্তুতিমূলক বৈঠকের মাধ্যমে। দেশ ও আঞ্চলিক মিটিং পরিচালিত হওয়ার পর প্রক্রিয়াটি নভেম্বর 2013 সালে ফিলিপাইনের সিলাং, ক্যাভিতে একটি বাস্তবায়ন কর্মশালার মাধ্যমে শেষ হয়। ইন্টারন্যাশনাল কমিটি (IC) / ট্রাস্টি বোর্ড এবং নির্বাহী পরিচালক দীর্ঘমেয়াদী কৌশলগত পরিকল্পনা প্রক্রিয়ার নির্দেশনা দেন। একজন প্রধান কৌশলবিদ, আইসি আহ্বায়ক এবং সচিবালয়ের কর্মীদের সমন্বয়ে গঠিত একটি কৌশল দল, বছরব্যাপী পরিকল্পনা পরিচালনা এবং সমাপ্তির তত্ত্বাবধান করে। এই নিবিড়, অংশগ্রহণমূলক এবং গতিশীল প্রক্রিয়ার শেষ ফলাফল হল "রোডম্যাপ", যা কার্যকরভাবে 2006 সালের দীর্ঘমেয়াদী কৌশল পরিকল্পনাকে ছাড়িয়ে যায়। কান্ট্রি কনসালটেশন আর্মেনিয়া, বাংলাদেশ, ভারত, ইন্দোনেশিয়া, মঙ্গোলিয়া, ফিলিপাইন এবং শ্রীলঙ্কায় কৌশলগত বৈঠক অনুষ্ঠিত হয়। উত্তর-পূর্ব ভারতে একটি উপ-জাতীয় পরামর্শ হয়েছে। 2013 সালের ফোরামের বার্ষিক সভায় কম্বোডিয়া, মায়ানমার এবং নেপালের একটি দেশের পরিস্থিতির একটি প্রতিবেদন ছিল। কান্ট্রি ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপগুলি এডিবি-সম্পর্কিত বিষয়গুলির বিষয়ে প্রচারাভিযান কার্যক্রমের পরিকল্পনা করার ক্ষেত্রে জাতীয় দৃষ্টিভঙ্গি বিবেচনা করেছে। সদস্যরা নেটওয়ার্ক সম্প্রসারণ এবং পুনরায় সক্রিয়করণ, ব্যাংকের উপর জনসাধারণের চাপ বৃদ্ধি এবং তাদের নিজ নিজ দেশে প্রচারণার টেকসইতা অর্জনের বিষয়ে কৌশল তৈরি করেছেন। আঞ্চলিক পরামর্শ মধ্য এশিয়া এবং ককেশাস (বিশকেক, কিরগিজস্তান), দক্ষিণ-পূর্ব এশিয়া (ব্যাংকক, থাইল্যান্ড) এবং দক্ষিণ এশিয়া (ঢাকা, বাংলাদেশ) অঞ্চলে কৌশল পরিকল্পনা হয়েছে। মেকং-এর জন্য একটি উপ-আঞ্চলিক গ্রুপিং সভা কম্বোডিয়া, ভিয়েতনাম, এবং এই অঞ্চলে অবস্থিত INGO-এর প্রতিনিধিদের অংশগ্রহণে ব্যাংককেও অনুষ্ঠিত হয়েছিল। আঞ্চলিক ওয়ার্কিং গ্রুপগুলি মূল বিষয়ভিত্তিক ক্ষেত্রগুলিকে অগ্রাধিকার দেয়, যার মধ্যে আন্তঃসীমান্ত সংযোগগুলি রয়েছে, যেখানে সমলয় এবং সমর্থনে পরিপূরকতা প্রতিষ্ঠা করা যেতে পারে। এটি তাদের কর্ম এবং হস্তক্ষেপের একটি পাঁচ বছরের একীভূত পরিকল্পনা তৈরি করতে সক্ষম করে। ছয় বছরের কৌশল পরিকল্পনা "রোডম্যাপ" চলমান এবং ভবিষ্যতের আঞ্চলিক বিষয়ভিত্তিক প্রচারাভিযান পরিচালনায় ফোরামকে গাইড করে। এটি তার অ্যাডভোকেসি ওয়াকের প্রভাব/গুলি পর্যবেক্ষণ এবং পরিচালনার জন্য একটি প্রক্রিয়া প্রদান করে। একইভাবে, এটি ফোরামের ক্রিয়াকলাপের প্রভাবের ফলাফলের সাথে আরও শিখতে সাহায্য করে। ফোরামটি মধ্য এশিয়া, দক্ষিণ-পূর্ব এশিয়া এবং দক্ষিণ এশিয়ায় পাঁচটি কার্যকরী থিম: জল, শক্তি, জলবায়ু পরিবর্তন, নগরায়ণ এবং মানবাধিকারের উপর ওকালতিকে গড়ে তুলছে এবং মূল্য যোগ করছে। সুরক্ষা (পরিবেশ, অনিচ্ছাকৃত পুনর্বাসন, আদিবাসী) এবং লিঙ্গকে ক্রস-কাটিং সমস্যা হিসাবে চিহ্নিত করা হয়েছে। আশা করা হচ্ছে যে 2020 সালের মধ্যে, এশিয়ার জনগণের কণ্ঠস্বর এবং সংস্থা, বিশেষ করে দরিদ্র এবং প্রান্তিকদের, এডিবিকে আরও দীর্ঘস্থায়ী এবং পদ্ধতিগত পরিবর্তনের দিকে সম্পৃক্ত করার জন্য একটি টেকসই ক্ষমতায় উত্থাপিত হবে। এর কারণ হল ফোরাম কার্যকরভাবে ADB এবং এর ঋণগ্রহীতাদেরকে সুশীল সমাজ এবং অন্যান্য স্টেকহোল্ডারদের সাথে তাদের গঠনমূলক আলোচনায় সত্যিকারের জবাবদিহি, স্বচ্ছ, উন্মুক্ত এবং প্রস্তুত হওয়ার জন্য চাপ দিয়েছে।

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. Frequently Asked Questions History Network Structure International Committee International Secretariat FAQ ADB তে NGO ফোরাম কি? এনজিও ফোরাম অন এডিবি হল সুশীল সমাজ সংস্থার (সিএসও) একটি নেটওয়ার্ক যা এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংক (এডিবি) এবং এশিয়ান ইনফ্রাস্ট্রাকচার ইনভেস্টমেন্ট ব্যাংক (এআইআইবি) এর প্রকল্প, কর্মসূচি এবং নীতিগুলি পর্যবেক্ষণ করছে। ফোরাম 1992 সাল থেকে সক্রিয়। ফোরামটি তার সদস্যদের নেতৃত্বে প্রকল্প, প্রোগ্রাম এবং/অথবা নীতি-নির্দিষ্ট প্রচারাভিযানে সহায়তা করছে এবং সক্ষমতা বৃদ্ধির কর্মশালা পরিচালনা করছে। ADB-এর এনজিও ফোরাম ADB-এর কাছ থেকে অর্থ গ্রহণ করে না বা এটি কোনোভাবেই এর অংশ নয়। ফোরাম সচিবালয় ফিলিপাইনের কুইজন সিটিতে অবস্থিত।

PAKISTAN BANGLADESH INDIA INDONESIA PHILIPPINES বাংলাদেশ বাংলাদেশ সূত্র: বাংলাদেশ: কোভিড-১৯ অ্যাক্টিভ রেসপন্স অ্যান্ড এক্সপেন্ডিচার সাপোর্ট প্রোগ্রাম LATEST NEWS UPDATES 19 November 2021 ADB approves $500million loan to help Indonesia improve human capital 5 April 2021 ADB approves $450 M loan to help Indonesia deliver effective COVID-19 vaccines

Explore key terms used in the Forum Network infographics on ADB energy projects. This glossary explains financing modalities, grants, loans, equity investments, and technical assistance in simple terms. Glossary of Terms in the Forum Network Infographics on ADB Energy Projects This glossary provides key terms used in the Forum Network infographics on ADB energy projects. These terms describe various financial instruments and approaches used by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in its operations. E (Equity Investment) | Direct investment in a company or project, making ADB a shareholder to support development goals. Financing Modality | The specific method or instrument used to fund development projects and programs. Grant | Financial aid that does not need to be repaid, typically used for projects that support low-income countries, environmental sustainability, or social development. Loan | Borrowed funding that must be repaid, used to finance development projects in ADB member countries. Modality | ADB's financing or operational approach for projects, programs, or technical assistance, tailored to the needs of member countries. TA (Technical Assistance) | Support for capacity building, policy advice, and project preparation in member countries, often provided through grants or expert guidance.

Dive into AIIB-funded infrastructure projects across Southeast Asia with analysis from NGO Forum on ADB, focusing on project monitoring, community rights, environmental impacts, and civil society efforts to promote transparency, accountability, and just development. এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংক (এডিবি) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Project-affected People's Mechanism (PPM) AIIB Annual Meeting প্রজেক্ট মনিটরিং North Dhaka Waste to Energy Project COUNTRY: Bangladesh APPROVED FUNDING: USD100 million FINANCING TYPE: Nonsovereign The North Dhaka Waste-to-Energy Project is a 42.5 MW incineration facility situated near the Amin Bazar landfill, co-financed by the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) with a $100 million non-sovereign loan, and the New Development Bank (NDB), aiming to process municipal solid waste into energy through four 750-ton/day incineration lines and twin 35 MW turbo-generators connected to Savar’s grid. It is Bangladesh’s first large-scale waste-to-energy venture, categorized as AIIB Environmental & Social Category A, necessitating an ESIA, ESMP, and corrective action plan to address legacy land-acquisition issues and ongoing environmental risks. However, civil society watchdogs like CLEAN and urgewald have raised alarm over potentially higher greenhouse gas emissions (estimated at 8.3 million tons CO₂ equivalent over 25 years), toxic air pollutants (dioxins, heavy metals), and poor waste-quality control, which may undermine Bangladesh’s climate commitments. Critics also point out that weak waste collection systems could threaten plant operations, while energy tariffs set at over twice the current cost may burden taxpayers. Local environmental groups have emphasized deficiencies in public consultation, community grievance mechanisms, and transparency—citing AIIB’s historical track record of excluding affected communities during project approvals. As Bangladesh seeks sustainable waste solutions, the North Dhaka WtE project's technical ambitions must be balanced with stronger social and environmental accountability to ensure it genuinely serves both urban sanitation and climate-resilient development. Read the AIIB Observer Volume 3 Balakot Hydropower Development Project COUNTRY: Pakistan APPROVED FUNDING: USD250 million FINANCING TYPE: Sovereign The Balakot Hydropower Project in Pakistan is a 300 MW run-of-river initiative on the Kunhar River, financed by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) with a $250 million sovereign loan alongside a $300 million loan from the Asian Development Bank (ADB), intended to boost renewable energy generation (1143 GWh annually) and local employment. Despite its clean energy aims, the project has drawn widespread local backlash: residents and local councils are protesting ongoing land acquisition practices, demanding that affected families receive fair compensation, employment opportunities, and respect for ancestral sites—threatening to block major roads in response. Authorities have reportedly demolished structures and deployed police to protect Chinese engineers and workers amid community tensions. The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government has also issued delay notices to contractors due to slow progress. Critics contend that although AIIB and ADB classify the project as environmentally sound under their frameworks, on-ground realities suggest weak community engagement, inadequate grievance redressal, and contested livelihood impacts. As such, Balakot offers a cautionary tale: major hydropower projects financed by global banks must pair technical and environmental standards with meaningful local accountability to avoid marginalizing host communities. Read the factsheet . Bangalore Metro Rail Project - Line R6 COUNTRY: India APPROVED FUNDING: USD335 million FINANCING TYPE: Sovereign The Bengaluru Metro’s ORR–Airport Line (Phases 2A and 2B), stretching 58.19 km from Central Silk Board to Kempegowda International Airport via KR Puram, is a transformative infrastructure project aimed at easing urban congestion and improving airport connectivity. Funded by a mix of public and external sources—including the Asian Development Bank (ADB), Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), and controversially, the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB)—the project has drawn scrutiny from civil society organizations like Growthwatch, which have raised concerns over AIIB’s opaque financing practices and lack of strong accountability safeguards. While ADB has provided a $500 million loan and a $2 million grant to support inclusive, transit-oriented development, and JICA has offered ₹3,717 crore, AIIB’s growing footprint in Indian infrastructure is criticized for prioritizing geopolitical interests over local participation and environmental transparency. Construction began in 2021, with official targets set for completion by 2026, though delays—especially in Phase 2B—remain a concern. Growthwatch has also flagged issues with land acquisition, labor conditions, and the need for greater community consultation. Despite these challenges, the metro line is expected to benefit over 1.6 million daily commuters and reduce dependence on road transport. However, as Bengaluru’s transport infrastructure grows, the role of financial institutions like AIIB must be critically examined to ensure democratic oversight, equity, and long-term sustainability in urban development. Read - Growthwatch Letter to AIIB Derailed by the Accountability Ciap The Students of the Technical Training Centre for the Deaf (TTCD) in Bangalore, India Impact assessment of Bangalore Metro Rail Project (Reach 6) on vulnerable communities at the Cantonment Metro station BMRP & TTCD Narrative Bangladesh Bhola IPP COUNTRY: Bangladesh APPROVED FUNDING: USD60 million FINANCING TYPE: Nonsovereign The Bhola Independent Power Producer (IPP) project in Bangladesh is a 220 MW combined-cycle gas-fired power plant developed on Bhola Island by Nutan Bidyut (a subsidiary of Shapoorji Pallonji) under a Build-Own-Operate (BOO) model to address the country’s chronic power shortages. Co-financed by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB)—which approved a $60 million non-sovereign loan in 2018—alongside the Islamic Development Bank and local financiers, the project was expected to generate over 1.3 TWh of electricity annually and began commercial operations in late 2019. While AIIB classified the project as Category B, implying limited environmental and social risks, and adopted frameworks for resettlement and stakeholder consultation, civil society organizations have strongly contested this assessment. In particular, CLEAN (Coastal Livelihood and Environmental Action Network), working with BWGED and NGO Forum on ADB, has played a central role in documenting serious harms caused by the project—including coerced land acquisition, destruction of farmland, waterlogging, river siltation, loss of grazing lands, and the absence of meaningful consultation or grievance redress mechanisms. In 2022, CLEAN co-filed the first formal complaint to AIIB’s Project-Affected People’s Mechanism, directly challenging the bank’s risk classification and safeguard enforcement. These findings have been echoed by international media, including Climate Home News, which criticized AIIB’s continued investment in fossil gas projects like Bhola IPP while sidelining renewable alternatives. Beyond research, CLEAN has also mobilized civil society campaigns and public actions urging AIIB to stop fossil fuel financing and adopt community-driven, sustainable energy models. Critics argue that the Bhola IPP reflects deeper structural issues in AIIB’s development approach—namely, opaque financing, weak local accountability, and inadequate environmental and social protections—particularly in contexts where civic space is limited. As such, the Bhola case serves as a warning of how large-scale, fossil-intensive energy infrastructure can disproportionately burden marginalized communities, underscoring the urgent need for transparent, inclusive, and rights-based alternatives in global energy investment. Read: Lessons learned: Filing Bhola IPP complaint in AIIB’s project affected people’s mechanism Unique Meghnaghat IPP COUNTRY: Bangladesh APPROVED FUNDING: USD110 million FINANCING TYPE: Nonsovereign The Unique Meghnaghat Power Plant in Bangladesh is a 584 MW combined-cycle gas-fired facility located along the Meghna River near Narayanganj, developed to strengthen the country’s electricity supply. While framed as a modern and “transition-ready” energy project—with features like hydrogen capability—it has faced criticism from civil society groups due to its environmental and social impacts. The project involved the acquisition of more land than officially reported, including agricultural fields and riverside areas crucial to local fishing communities. Many affected families reportedly received compensation far below market value, and the construction has led to issues like sand deposition on farmland, blocked grazing routes, and restricted river access. Although supported by international lenders under the banner of clean and reliable energy, the project has raised serious concerns about long-term fossil fuel dependency and the marginalization of local voices. Critics argue that the plant represents a continuation of top-down energy planning that prioritizes investment returns over community well-being and ecological sustainability. Read: The Meghnaghat Power Plant: A Looming Burden on Bangladesh

Follow the AIIB energy campaign led by NGO Forum on ADB and allies, spotlighting civil society efforts to push the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank away from fossil fuels and toward just, community-centered renewable energy transitions. এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংক (এডিবি) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Project-affected People's Mechanism (PPM) AIIB Annual Meeting প্রজেক্ট মনিটরিং The Forum network maintains that the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank’s (AIIB) ongoing support for fossil gas projects locks member countries into carbon-intensive energy systems and exposes them to global market volatility—an approach that is environmentally and economically irresponsible given AIIB’s limited resources and climate commitments (Urgewald, 2023; CLEAN & Forum on ADB, 2022). The network is also concerned that AIIB may increasingly shift toward high-risk sectors like large hydropower, waste-to-energy incineration, and geothermal, which have significant environmental and social costs. In particular, large hydro projects have a long record of displacing communities, damaging ecosystems, and generating conflict over land and water (International Rivers, 2021). The Forum calls for stricter financing criteria and meaningful consultation to ensure AIIB aligns with the goals of a just, community-centered energy transition. Read - Unpacking ADB and AIIB’s false narrative in COP29 Digital infrastructure for whom? Unpacking ADB and AIIB’s digital push AIIB Climate Advocacy Letter Critical Concerns on the Occasion of AIIB's Annual Meeting 2023 Open Statement on Collective Concerns Re: AIIB’s 2022 Energy Sector Strategy Update Re: Virtual Consultations Hosted by AIIB on the Energy Sector Strategy Update AIIB asked to go green, turn back on fossil fuels AIIB’s Extended Deadline for Public Input on the Energy Sector Strategy Update Collective Statement For the Energy Sector Strategy Update Collective Call for a New Forward-Looking AIIB Energy Sector Strategy Joint Submission by NGO Forum on ADB & Urgewald on the AIIB Environmental and Social Framework

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 Freedom from Debt Coalition from the Philippines and NGO Forum on ADB. Download Download UPDATES 15 January 2022 PH foreign borrowings, grants vs COVID-19 hit P1.3T 22 December 2021 Philippines borrows at least P32.6 billion for COVID-19 booster, kids’ shots 19 November 2021 ADB approves $600-million loan for Philippines’ universal health care 29 April 2021 Govt to get $3.9-B loans from Asian Development Bank 23 March 2021 What you need to know about Duterte’s COVID-19 loans WEBINAR SERIES: PHILIPPINES Dr. Rene Ofreneo from Freedom from Debt Coalition discussed the government’s response to the Covid pandemic – a long-running quarantine program and a “four-pillar socio-economic strategy”. He later zeroed in on what is happening in the health and economic sectors and the situation of the citizenry, with a special focus on the situation of the Filipino working population and the country’s progress in containing the virus spread and in promoting resilient economic recovery.

Track civil society engagement and critical perspectives around the AIIB Annual Meeting, with insights from NGO Forum on ADB highlighting concerns over fossil fuel financing, lack of accountability, and the need for inclusive, rights-based development in AIIB’s operations. এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংক (এডিবি) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Project-affected People's Mechanism (PPM) AIIB Annual Meeting প্রজেক্ট মনিটরিং Civil society engagement with the AIIB Annual Meetings has remained limited, fragmented, and largely symbolic—despite the bank’s public commitment to transparency and inclusive dialogue. While AIIB has opened some space for civil society to attend side events and submit questions, these forums often lack genuine responsiveness or avenues for influence. NGO Forum on ADB network have mobilized parallel events and issued joint statements to challenge AIIB’s financing of fossil fuel infrastructure, waste-to-energy incinerators, and large hydropower projects that frequently ignore the rights and voices of affected communities. The AIIB Annual Meetings are often criticized for prioritizing image management over accountability, with little space for grassroots concerns to shape policy or project design. Civil society continues to call for institutional reforms that would allow for more meaningful engagement, better access to project data, and stronger mechanisms for communities to be heard. Without these changes, AIIB’s Annual Meetings risk becoming performative exercises that fail to reflect the realities on the ground. Read - Civil society engagement and issues of concern regarding meaningful participation at the AIIB Annual Meeting 2024 Boycott of AIIB Annual Meeting 2024 due to lack of meaningful civil society engagement Critical Concerns on the Occasion of AIIB's Annual Meeting 2023 Raising Critical Concerns on the Occasion of AIIB’s Annual Meeting 2022 Key issues regarding the AIIB Annual Meeting 2021 Letter Civil society reflections on AIIB's 5th annual meeting (virtual), 2020 CSO's request for a meaningful dialogue in the Annual Meeting 2019 NGO Forum on ADB Statement to the AIIB President and management 2017 Press Statement of NGO Forum on ADB on the First AIIB Annual Meeting 2016 প্রজেক্ট মনিটরিং The AIIB Observer, published by the NGO Forum on ADB, serves as a sharp-edged watchdog newsletter highlighting contested AIIB investments—such as hydropower, waste-to-energy incineration, and fossil fuel infrastructure—and demanding accountability from the bank. Its latest edition called for a boycott of the AIIB’s Annual Meeting in Uzbekistan, arguing that AIIB consistently sidelines affected communities and reduces civic dialogue to PR theater. The Observer spotlights specific projects—like forced displacement in Indonesia’s Mandalika tourism zone, continued fossil energy investments through capital markets, and the controversial Rogun Mega‑Dam—and brings to light a joint societal call from over 30 organizations to reform the AIIB’s Project‑Affected People’s Mechanism. Ultimately, the publication contends that without genuine openness, responsive grievance processes, and community empowerment, AIIB risks perpetuating environmentally destructive and socially harmful development under the guise of promoting sustainable infrastructure. Beijing 2025 Samarkand 2024 Sharm El-Sheikh 2023

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.

ADB Energy Policy Countdown Letters to ADB Board Members This campaign unites local groups and allies to send coordinated, collective letters to ADB Board members as part of the ongoing Energy Policy review. By acting together, we create visible pressure on decision-makers, showing that concern for responsible energy policy is widespread and urgent. This pressure is crucial because it encourages the Board to prioritize public interest, climate action, and accountability, increasing the chances that the draft will reflect these priorities before it is finalized. Send Your Letter 1. Choose and download the letter that fits your focus Depending on your campaign focus, you can target your letter to the most relevant decision-makers at the ADB. This could be the Executive Director (ED) and Alternate Executive Director (AED) representing your country, or the ED and AED responsible for the specific project you are monitoring. Selecting the right recipients ensures that your message reaches the people with the authority to influence the policy or project, making your advocacy more effective. By Country (for Board of Directors and their alternates) Australia / Azerbaijan / Cambodia / Georgia / Hong Kong, China / Kiribati / Federated States of Micronesia / Nauru / Palau / Solomon Islands / Tuvalu Canada / Denmark / Finland / Ireland / The Netherlands / Norway / Sweden Austria / Germany / Luxembourg / Turkey / United Kingdom Armenia / Cook Islands / Fiji / Indonesia / Kyrgyz Republic / New Zealand / Niue / Samoa / Tonga Republic of Korea / Papua New Guinea / Sri Lanka / Taipei, China / Uzbekistan / Vanuatu / Vietnam Kazakhstan / Maldives / Marshall Islands / Mongolia / Pakistan / Philippines / Timor-Leste Belgium / France / Italy / Portugal / Spain / Switzerland/Israel Japan Afghanistan / Bangladesh / Bhutan / India / Lao People's Democratic Republic / Tajikistan / Turkmenistan Brunei Darussalam / Malaysia / Myanmar / Nepal / Singapore / Thailand United States People's Republic of China By Theme. You can select a letter based on the specific theme or issue you want to emphasize. Each letter is addressed to the Board of Directors, ADB, but you can choose which individual Board member(s) to send it to—whether it’s your country’s ED and AED or those responsible for a project you are monitoring. The available themes are Nuclear Energy Critical Minerals False Energy Solutions & Energy Transition Mechanisms (ETM) Strengthening Coal Prohibition Waste-to-Energy 2. Customize Your Letter. Fill out the two sections below the PDF and click Save. 3. Copy and paste the text below into your email - Dear Executive Director/Alternate Executive Director, We are writing to share our letter regarding the ongoing ADB Energy Policy review. We hope that you will take our perspectives into account as the Board considers the draft policy. Thank you for your time and attention to this critical matter. 4. Attach your PDF Letter 5. Send your letter to your intended recipient using your organization’s (or your own) official work email. Send us a short email letting us know which ADB ED or AED you want to send your letter to, and we will provide you with the correct contact address. Do not share the ADB Board of Directors’ emails publicly—unauthorized circulation may violate privacy rules. The information is intended for your personal use only to ensure your letter reaches the right decision-maker. Don't hesitate to get in touch with Denn (dennis@forum-adb.org ) or Jen (jen@forum-adb.org ), and they will give you the information. Send your letters by October 3, 2025 — when the Board will review the Draft ADB Energy Policy for approval

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. এশিয়ান ডেভেলপমেন্ট ব্যাংক (এডিবি) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030 প্রজেক্ট মনিটরিং ADB Safeguard Spotlight The Story of ADB Safeguards Related Documents ADB Project Tracker COVID19 Loan Tracker In 2024, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) is amidst Phase 3 of its process for revising the Environmental and Social Framework (ESF), presenting the first draft of the W paper after two years of consultations. However, the draft falls significantly short of expectations, failing to ensure robust environmental and social safeguarding. The draft ESF’s ‘Vision’ does not commit to the fundamental principle of ‘Do No Harm’ in ADB operations. This omission reflects the disregard for feedback from consultations. Terms like 'materially consistent', 'timely', and 'where applicable' are used ambiguously throughout the document, undermining environmental and social safeguarding accountability. These terms should be replaced with clear, mandatory, and time-bound standards. Despite investing over 40 million USD in Country Safeguard Systems over the past decade, the ADB has not demonstrated successful application of these systems for SPS 2009 implementation. This underscores the need for stringent implementation of the SPS 2009 and the new ESF. Financing should not be approved if borrower systems are less stringent, and any flexibility in applying these systems must be revoked from the ESF. The ESF should prioritize avoiding harm and restoring affected communities and environments to pre-project conditions or better. Its objective should not be aligned with green economic growth, which other ADB policies cover. The ESF must act as a safeguard to prevent and mitigate environmental and social risks comprehensively and on time. The draft ESF introduces the Mitigation Hierarchy without definition and omits critical components such as Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Social Impact Assessment (SIA). These assessments are central to the SPS 2009 but are absent in the 170-page document, raising concerns about the effectiveness of the proposed framework. The ESF draft fails to clarify the ADB Project Cycle and its approach to addressing project-related harms. The proposed Common Approach for Co-Financing with other Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) lacks commitment to the highest safeguard standards, potentially allowing lower standards to prevail. ADB must ensure the highest social and environmental standards for both standalone and co-financed projects. The draft includes problematic provisions like the treatment of Associated Facilities (AF), which are allowed to circumvent the ESF, contrary to the SPS 2009 policy. Moreover, the ESF is gender-blind, failing to address the fundamental rights and risks faced by women in project-affected areas. Binding language is needed to ensure gender safeguarding from the project design stage throughout the project cycle. Given these significant shortcomings, a full overhaul of the current draft ESF is essential. The ADB Board and Management must revisit the drawing board before finalizing the policy. The subsequent sections of this critique provide detailed analysis and specific concerns raised by civil society and labor organizations, urging a more robust and effective ESF. This comprehensive critique underscores the urgent need for the ADB to strengthen its commitment to environmental and social safeguarding in its revised ESF to ensure sustainable and equitable development outcomes.