Search Results

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. แผนยุทธศาสตร์ปี 2563 ฟอรัม NGO เกี่ยวกับ ADB ถูกกำหนดให้ใช้ "แผนงานในการรณรงค์เชิงกลยุทธ์ 2014-2020: สู่การเปลี่ยนแปลงที่ยั่งยืนและเป็นระบบ" อีก 6 ปีข้างหน้าจะเห็น Forum มุ่งมั่นที่จะทำให้เกิดการเปลี่ยนแปลงอย่างเป็นระบบภายใน ADB และโดยการขยายลูกค้าเพื่อให้ตอบสนองด้วยความรับผิดชอบที่มากขึ้นต่อความต้องการด้านการพัฒนาและบริบทท้องถิ่นของชุมชนเอเชีย ในนามของผู้ที่ได้รับผลกระทบ ซึ่งมีช่องโหว่เพิ่มขึ้นจากวาระการพัฒนาที่เบ้ของ ADB จุดศูนย์กลางสำหรับคณะทำงานและองค์กรสมาชิกคือการเสริมสร้างเสียงและความสามารถของคนยากจน ผู้หญิง กลุ่มชาติพันธุ์ และภาคส่วนชายขอบ กระบวนการวางแผน ฟอรัมเริ่มวางกลยุทธ์เกี่ยวกับกรอบงาน แผนแคมเปญ และการออกแบบองค์กรในเดือนธันวาคม 2555 โดยจัดการประชุมเพื่อเตรียมความพร้อมในกรุงเทพฯ ประเทศไทย หลังจากดำเนินการประชุมระดับประเทศและระดับภูมิภาคแล้ว กระบวนการที่สิ้นสุดในเดือนพฤศจิกายน 2556 ผ่านการประชุมเชิงปฏิบัติการด้านการดำเนินการในเมืองสิลัง เมืองคาวิท ประเทศฟิลิปปินส์ คณะกรรมการระหว่างประเทศ (IC) / คณะกรรมการมูลนิธิและกรรมการบริหารเป็นแนวทางในกระบวนการวางแผนกลยุทธ์ระยะยาว ทีมกลยุทธ์ที่ประกอบด้วยหัวหน้านักยุทธศาสตร์ ผู้ประชุม IC และเจ้าหน้าที่สำนักเลขาธิการ ดูแลการดำเนินการและการวางแผนตลอดทั้งปีให้เสร็จสิ้น ผลลัพธ์สุดท้ายของกระบวนการที่เข้มข้น มีส่วนร่วม และไม่หยุดนิ่งนี้คือ “แผนงาน” ซึ่งเข้ามาแทนที่แผนกลยุทธ์ระยะยาวปี 2549 อย่างมีประสิทธิภาพ ที่ปรึกษาประเทศ การประชุมยุทธศาสตร์จัดขึ้นในอาร์เมเนีย บังคลาเทศ อินเดีย อินโดนีเซีย มองโกเลีย ฟิลิปปินส์ และศรีลังกา มีการปรึกษาหารือระดับย่อยในอินเดียตะวันออกเฉียงเหนือ มีการรายงานสถานการณ์ของประเทศเกี่ยวกับกัมพูชา เมียนมาร์ และเนปาลในการประชุมประจำปี 2013 Forum Forum คณะทำงานระดับประเทศตระหนักถึงมุมมองระดับชาติในการวางแผนกิจกรรมการรณรงค์ที่เกี่ยวข้องกับประเด็นที่เกี่ยวข้องกับ ADB สมาชิกวางกลยุทธ์เกี่ยวกับวิธีการขยายและเปิดใช้งานเครือข่ายให้บรรลุผล เพิ่มแรงกดดันสาธารณะต่อธนาคาร และความยั่งยืนของแคมเปญในประเทศของตน การให้คำปรึกษาระดับภูมิภาค การวางแผนกลยุทธ์เกิดขึ้นในภูมิภาคเอเชียกลางและคอเคซัส (บิชเคก คีร์กีซสถาน) เอเชียตะวันออกเฉียงใต้ (กรุงเทพฯ ไทย) และเอเชียใต้ (ธากา บังกลาเทศ) การประชุมกลุ่มอนุภูมิภาคสำหรับแม่น้ำโขงที่เข้าร่วมโดยผู้แทนจากกัมพูชา เวียดนาม และ INGOs ที่ตั้งอยู่ในภูมิภาคนั้นได้จัดขึ้นที่กรุงเทพฯ ด้วย คณะทำงานระดับภูมิภาคจัดลำดับความสำคัญของพื้นที่เฉพาะเรื่องที่สำคัญ ซึ่งรวมถึงความเชื่อมโยงข้ามพรมแดน ซึ่งสามารถสร้างความสอดคล้องและความสอดคล้องในการสนับสนุนได้ สิ่งนี้ทำให้พวกเขาสามารถพัฒนาแผนปฏิบัติการและการแทรกแซงรวมระยะเวลาห้าปี แผนยุทธศาสตร์ 6 ปี “แผนงาน” เป็นแนวทางในฟอรัมในการดำเนินการแคมเปญเฉพาะเรื่องระดับภูมิภาคที่กำลังดำเนินอยู่และในอนาคต มีกลไกสำหรับการติดตามและจัดการผลกระทบของกระทะสนับสนุน ในทำนองเดียวกัน ฟอรั่มยังทำหน้าที่ในการเรียนรู้เพิ่มเติมของฟอรั่มเทียบกับผลการดำเนินการของฟอรั่ม ฟอรัมกำลังสร้างและเพิ่มมูลค่าให้กับการสนับสนุนในเอเชียกลาง เอเชียตะวันออกเฉียงใต้ และเอเชียใต้ในห้าหัวข้อการทำงาน: น้ำ พลังงาน การเปลี่ยนแปลงสภาพภูมิอากาศ การขยายตัวของเมือง และสิทธิมนุษยชน การป้องกัน (สิ่งแวดล้อม การตั้งถิ่นฐานใหม่โดยไม่สมัครใจ ชนพื้นเมือง) และเพศสภาพได้ระบุว่าเป็นปัญหาข้ามพรมแดน เป็นที่คาดหวังว่าภายในปี 2020 เสียงและหน่วยงานของผู้คนในเอเชีย โดยเฉพาะอย่างยิ่งคนยากจนและคนชายขอบ จะได้รับการยกระดับขึ้นด้วยความสามารถที่ยั่งยืนในการดึงดูด ADB ไปสู่การเปลี่ยนแปลงที่ยั่งยืนและเป็นระบบมากขึ้น เนื่องจากฟอรัมได้ผลักดัน ADB และผู้กู้อย่างมีประสิทธิภาพให้มีความรับผิดชอบ โปร่งใส เปิดกว้างและพร้อมในการเจรจาที่สร้างสรรค์กับภาคประชาสังคมและผู้มีส่วนได้ส่วนเสียอื่นๆ

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.

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. ธนาคารเพื่อการพัฒนาเอเชีย (ADB) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030 การตรวจสอบโครงการ Letter on ADB’s flawed July 22 CSO consultation Two decades in ADB’s ACEF: a race away from 1.5°c - NGO Forum on ADB Statement on the ADB Asia Clean Energy Forum 2025 Forum Network urgent concerns on ADB Energy Policy Review 2025 Forum Network Letter – Concerns on ADB CM2CET Value Chains Approach Unpacking ADB and AIIB’s false narrative in COP29 Re: Climate-Smart Mining for a New Climate Economy (Project 57273-001) Latest News Latest Events/Activities

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. ธนาคารเพื่อการพัฒนาเอเชีย (ADB) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030 การตรวจสอบโครงการ Latest News ADB Project Tracker Media Sign the 1M Petition The Asian Development Bank’s (ADB) Public Communications Policy (PCP) guides the ADB’s external relations when it comes to transparency and in its operations. The PCP, also known as the policy on information disclosure, intends to provide greater access to project information documents and related information. It ensures participation by project-affected people in the development intervention of the ADB in their respective communities. It mandates all project-related documents to be posted on the ADB’s website. Access to project-related information by local people allows them to participate actively and effectively in decision-making processes related to the development agenda of international financial institutions such as the ADB in their respective communities which could adversely affect the environment and disrupt their living conditions. Issues with the PCP Though it has been stating that it values transparency and is committed to increasing information disclosure, the ADB has fallen short on its commitment to respecting the rights of the people’s right to information. The PCP does not expressly recognize public access to information is a right. Experiences on the ground have shown that the Bank lacks both the political will and the resources to respect this right. Documents identified by the ADB as publicly available are only accessible through its website. This has prevented poor communities from getting project-related information since the internet facility remains a luxury for them. Civil society groups believe that this manifests the pro-business bias of the Bank’s disclosure policy. The PCP also provides a long list of exceptions. Not all exceptions identify the serious harm to a clearly and narrowly defined, and broadly accepted, an interest that is sought to be avoided by non-disclosure. Below are NGO forum on ADB's submission, communication, and other documents on its campaign on a just ADB PCP - 05 Apr 2018 | Joint Submission of NGO Forum on ADB and Both ENDS Comments on the 2nd draft of the Public Communications Policy 14 Jan 2018 | NGO Forum on ADB's Summary Comments on the PCP Review 28 Nov 2017 | NGO Forum on ADB Summary Comments (meeting with PCP Review Team) 16 Jul 2017 | NGO Forum on ADB Letter to the ongoing consultations related to the Review of the Public Communications Policy (PCP) 12 Jul 2017 | Summary of questions and comments during the country consultations 26 Mar 2017 | ADB's response to Forum's submission on PCP Review 23 Jul 2017 | ADB's response to Forum's Letter to the ongoing consultations related to the review of the PCP (dated 17 July 2017) 17 Aug 2017 | Comments of NGO Forum on ADB on the draft staff instructions 30 Nov 2016 | NGO Forum on ADB Submission on the Draft Public Communications Policy of the Asian Development Bank 10 May 2016 | Public Communications Policy Review 04 May 2011 | NGOs warn ‘safety valve’ may impede ADB’s small success in transparency 13 Jan 2011 | ADB Must Clinch the Opportunity for Bolder PCP Reforms 22 Sep 2010 | Letter to PCP Review Team 31 Jan 2010 | Practice What You Preach 31 Jan 2009 | Statistical highlights on the Asian Development Bank’s Public Communications Policy Implementation (August 2005 to February 2009)

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. ธนาคารเพื่อการพัฒนาเอเชีย (ADB) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030 การตรวจสอบโครงการ Latest News Latest Events/Activities Civil society slams ADB’s “clean energy” claims at ACEF 2025 As the Asian Development Bank marks 20 years of the Asia Clean Energy Forum (ACEF), civil society groups across Asia are calling it two decades of greenwashing. In a powerful joint statement, they denounce ADB’s continued backing of fossil fuels, harmful technologies, and corporate polluters, warning that false solutions like gas, mining, and incineration are worsening the climate crisis. With the bank’s energy policy review underway, they demand a real shift toward justice, equity, and people-powered renewable systems. Read Press Release

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. ธนาคารเพื่อการพัฒนาเอเชีย (ADB) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Project-affected People's Mechanism (PPM) AIIB Annual Meeting การตรวจสอบโครงการ 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

ทรัพยากร 2022 December Special Issue September June Marc h 2021 December September June March 2020 ธันวาคม กันยายน มิถุนายน มีนาคม 2019 ธันวาคม กันยายน มิถุนายน มีนาคม กำลังมองหาปัญหา Bankwatch ที่เก่ากว่าอยู่ใช่ไหม ขอสำเนาได้ที่ secretariat[at]forum-adb.org

PAKISTAN BANGLADESH INDIA INDONESIA PHILIPPINES บังคลาเทศ บังคลาเทศ ที่มา: บังกลาเทศ: โครงการสนับสนุนการตอบสนองและการใช้จ่ายของ COVID-19 ที่ใช้งานอยู่ 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).

The NGO Forum on ADB is an Asian-led network of civil society organizations (CSOs), based in Asia and the Pacific region. การตรวจสอบโครงการ 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. ธนาคารเพื่อการพัฒนาเอเชีย (ADB) 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. การตรวจสอบโครงการ 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 ธนาคารเพื่อการพัฒนาเอเชีย (ADB) 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. การตรวจสอบโครงการ 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 ธนาคารเพื่อการพัฒนาเอเชีย (ADB) Project Monitoring Energy Campaign Safeguards Public Information Policy Accountability Mechanism Strategy 2030