Connect with us

NGO WORK

World Bank is backing dozens of new coal projects, despite climate pledges

Published

on

New research shows that the International Finance Corporation, part of the World Bank Group, is providing back-door support to at least 39 new coal projects, constituting over 68 gigawatts of new coal-fired power capacity throughout China, Indonesia and Cambodia.

The International Finance Corporation (IFC), the private lending arm of the World Bank Group, is indirectly backing dozens of new coal projects throughout Asia, according to a new report, Blowing Smoke: How Coal Finance is Flowing through the IFC’s Paris Alignment Loopholes. The report, based on research conducted by Inclusive Development International, Recourse and Trend Asia, was published today, in advance of the World Bank Annual Meetings taking place in Marrakech next week.

“We found that the IFC is still backing new coal capacity through its investments in banks and other financial institutions despite its commitments to align those investments with the Paris Agreement,” said David Pred, executive director of Inclusive Development International. “This is the opposite of the sustainable development that IFC purports to promote, and it is having a devastating impact on coal-affected communities throughout Asia and the entire planet in this time of climate peril.”

A planned 700-megawatt coal-fired power plant called Jambi 2, to be located in Indonesia’s Jambi province, is among the new coal projects the IFC is indirectly supporting. The new report focuses on Jambi 2 as a case study for how the IFC’s lending ends up supporting new coal development and the impact that has on local communities. According to local advocates and community members interviewed by Inclusive Development International, Jambi 2 is a project the province doesn’t want and doesn’t need—one that will exacerbate the already devastating impacts of coal development in the area, including air and water pollution and related health issues. Yet Postal Savings Bank of China—an IFC intermediary and a major coal financier in the region—has provided a credit line to Jambi 2’s developer, China Huadian.

“Ongoing coal development in Indonesia, including the Jambi 2 plant, will accelerate climate change and its catastrophic consequences,” said Novita Indri, energy campaigner at Trend Asia. “It’s a slap in the face to Indonesia, an island nation that is uniquely vulnerable to rising sea levels and already suffering from extreme weather events.”

Postal Savings Bank of China is by far the largest financier of coal developers in the IFC’s portfolio. According to data compiled by Inclusive Development International and published alongside the new report, the IFC purchased a $300 million equity stake in Postal Savings Bank in 2015 and the bank has gone on to provide 418 billion RMB ($57.3 billion) in no-strings-attached credit lines and project loans to companies developing dozens of coal-fired power plants in the region. The bank has provided these loans at a time when much of the financial industry is shifting away from coal, implicating the IFC and the World Bank Group in the last vestiges of coal finance and the devastating impacts it has for coal-affected communities and the climate. The authors of the report are calling on the IFC to leverage its influence as a major shareholder to stop Postal Savings Bank from continuing to finance coal development.

“It’s hypocritical for the IFC to allow its banking clients to finance projects like Jambi 2 and other coal development in Asia while at the same time promising to align its lending with the Paris Agreement on Climate Change,” said Kate Geary, co-director of Recourse. “While committing to move away from coal on paper, the World Bank Group is failing to ensure that its investments aren’t  supporting coal power projects that are significant contributors to climate change and that wreak devastation on affected communities.”

These latest revelations come on the heels of reports last month that communities in Indonesia’s Banten province have lodged a formal complaint against the IFC for backing two new massive units in the Suralaya mega-coal complex. Similar complaints have been lodged against the IFC in the past, including regarding its support for coal expansion in the Philippines.

“The IFC has contributed to serious harms related to coal expansion in many countries,” added Pred. “Now it has a responsibility to repair the damage it has done and prevent future harm by requiring that all of its financial intermediary clients, including Postal Savings Bank of China, stop financing coal development immediately.”

Notes for editors:

Regarding IFC’s financial intermediary lending and “no coal” commitments

Inclusive Development International previously followed the money in the IFC’s financial-sector portfolio and published our findings in our Outsourcing Development investigative series, which exposed (among other things) the coal plants and mines the IFC was indirectly backing.

Since then, the World Bank Group has made a series of commitments designed to reform its approach to investing in financial institutions, reduce its exposure to coal and align itself with the Paris Agreement. Most prominently, in 2019 the IFC launched its Green Equity Approach, which requires financial institutions in which it holds shares to halve their coal exposure by 2025 and eliminate it from their portfolios by the end of the decade. In 2023, the IFC closed a major loophole that Inclusive Development International, Recourse and Trend Asia pointed out in the approach by updating the rules to restrict equity clients from financing any new coal projects.

However, the IFC’s flagship approach aligning its indirect lending operations with the Paris Agreement contains other loopholes and gray areas: it still allows equity clients to underwrite bonds for coal developers, and it allows clients to finance industrial projects that are powered by dedicated coal plants, a concept known as captive coal. And it is unclear how and whether the “no new coal” rule is being applied to existing clients’ corporate financing of coal developers. In fact, as our new research and report show, banks in which the IFC holds equity stakes—including Postal Savings Bank of China—have continued to provide financing to the developers of new coal projects.

Regarding our methodology

For this report, Inclusive Development International traced the International Finance Corporation’s money through financial intermediaries to new coal-fired power capacity in Asia. The full results are here.

We define new coal capacity as projects that have become operational since 2019; projects that are under construction; and projects that have been announced by developers. This data does not include projects that are listed as shelved or canceled, although developers regularly reactivate shelved projects after long periods of inactivity.

For all data on coal plants, including project names, generating capacity, development timelines and project owners, we relied on the Global Energy Monitor, which tracks energy infrastructure around the world. For data on project developers, including their current coal-generating capacities, development plans, and issuances of debt securities, we relied on the Global Coal Exit List, which the IFC also uses  to help its clients identify coal exposures in their portfolios.

All other data comes from research conducted by Inclusive Development International, Recourse and Trend Asia into corporate filings, the International Finance Corporation’s project disclosures, and site visits in Indonesia.

Source: inclusivedevelopment.net

Continue Reading

NGO WORK

Press Release | African Women in Action: AfDB, Reparations NOT Debt!

Published

on

The Regional Week of Action taking place from 28 to 31 July 2025, is part of a growing movement demanding reparations from the African Development Bank (AfDB) for decades of financing extractive, patriarchal, and profit-driven “development” on the continent. It is an important moment of Pan African mobilisation for women on the frontlines of resistance against AfDB funded maldevelopment in Africa.

“AfDB, Reparations NOT Debt” is the message that hundreds of women in West and Central Africa will voice as they carry out their bold, vibrant actions to challenge the destructive development model financed by the AfDB. Communities and particularly women whose livelihoods and ways of life have been destroyed by the construction and exploitation of mega-projects such as hydroelectric dams, mining, monoculture plantations and other big developments, will rally to call attention to the impacts they face.

The recent AfDB Counter Space held from 21-23 May in Abidjan was aimed at shifting the mainstream neoliberal development narrative and help create space to strengthen solidarity and resistance to AfDB’s continued support for maldevelopment in African communities, concluding in the Abidjan Declaration.

Across five countries – Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Niger, and Guinea – communities will participate in public testimonials, creative actions, community, and online mobilisations, and amplify official demands for reparations. They will make visible the true costs of extractive mega-projects on their land, their livelihoods, and nature.

Women from Batchenga in Cameroon and Bomboré in Burkina Faso will gather during this week to share traditional practices and techniques for crafting organic fertilisers to restore their land and preserve ecosystems. In Côte d’Ivoire, women from Singrobo are joining hands for a day of awareness-raising and intergenerational dialogue around a memory tree.

We are not against development. We are against destruction. If ‘development’ is destruction in disguise, then we say NO,” said Massaouda, a community leader in Niger and member of the steering committee of the AfDB, Reparations NOT Debt campaign.

The campaign: “AfDB, Reparations NOT Debt” calls for:

  • An immediate end to destructive mega-extractive projects.
  • Reparations for women and their communities affected.
  • A transition to ecofeminist alternatives centred on people, not profit.

This Week of Action is a continuation of regional mobilisations in 2023 and 2024 and marks a new stage in the struggle for reparations in Africa.

Source: WoMin

Continue Reading

NGO WORK

Toxic platforms, broken planet: How online abuse of land and environmental defenders harms climate action

Published

on

Land and environmental defenders risk their lives advocating for their communities’ rights against destructive industries. Often, they serve as the planet’s last line of defence, sounding the alarm about existential threats to humanity.

Their efforts frequently expose them to dangers to their safety and wellbeing. Every year, Global Witness documents these harms. In our 2024 report, we found that 196 people were murdered for defending their land and homes. Many more were abducted, criminalised and silenced by threats.

Defenders often rely on digital platforms to organise, share information and campaign. In recent years, these online spaces have become many defenders’ main channels for communication with key audiences, and are frequently relied upon for community organising. However, we now know that they suffer significant harms in these online spaces, from trolling, to doxxing, to cyberattacks.

An Indigenous activist photographs another community member after a protest march for Indigenous land rights in Brazil. Land and environmental defenders often rely on digital platforms to spread awareness about their campaigns. Mario Tama / Getty Images

Global Witness conducted a global survey – the first of its kind – to understand defenders’ experiences online. We found that online abuse is very common among defenders who responded to the survey, and frequently translates into offline harm, including harassment, violence and arrests.

This not only hurts defenders’ wellbeing but also has a chilling effect on the climate movement, with many defenders reporting a loss of productivity and, in one case, even ending all their activism due to the abuse.

Our survey shows the challenges defenders face on social media.

The situation is so dire that 91% of the defenders who responded to our survey said that they believe digital platforms should do more to keep them and their communities safe.

It doesn’t need to be this way. Social media companies’ business models prioritise profit over user safety. They can and must do more to help protect these individuals by properly investing in algorithmic transparency, content moderation, and safety and integrity resourcing.

Improving these measures will not only keep defenders safe online but will also benefit all users everywhere.

An Indigenous person documents the Acampamento Terra Livre (Free Land Camp) on a smartphone in Brasilia, Brazil

An Indigenous person documents the Acampamento Terra Livre (Free Land Camp) on a smartphone in Brasília, Brazil. Cícero Pedrosa Neto / Global Witness

A note on sampling: Surveying land and environmental defenders

Land and environmental defenders are a difficult group to reach en masse. Many such individuals have very real and immediate security concerns that require them to be highly careful about how they discuss their activism. No professional survey company has a panel of defenders available for polling.

We therefore had to manually contact defenders’ organisations by a variety of means and do our best to ensure that we had as many people as possible from as many different places respond to our survey.

We acknowledge that our survey sample is therefore not representative of all defenders and, given the nature of the survey, we have not sought to verify the accuracy of their statements.

This report is the first of its kind focusing specifically on the digital threats faced by land and environmental defenders, and the role that social media platforms play in this. We have built on our existing networks to reach hundreds of defenders globally.

This report is a crucial effort to uncover the nature of online harm faced by those on the frontlines of the climate movement and another puzzle piece in understanding what it means to stand in the way of climate breakdown.

These shocking and previously untold stories must prompt real action from social media platforms, who have often failed to act on reports of abuse.

Toxic platforms, broken planet

Widespread online attacks

Many land and environmental defenders experience abuse

92% of the land and environmental defenders who responded to our survey say that they have experienced some form of online abuse or harassment as a result of their work.

The online harms that these defenders report being subjected to range from public attacks on social media, to doxxing, to cyberattacks.

Doxxing

Doxxing (short for dropping docs) is the act of publicly revealing someone’s private or personally identifiable information without their consent, typically with malicious intent. This information can include real names, addresses, phone numbers, workplace details, financial information and even family members’ details.

Doxxing can be used as a form of harassment and intimidation of defenders, and it can lead to serious consequences like stalking, identity theft, swatting (making a false emergency call to send police to someone’s home) or physical harm. It is generally considered unethical and is illegal in many jurisdictions.

Cyberattacks

Cyberattacks are malicious attempts to disrupt, damage, or gain unauthorised access to computer systems, networks, or data. These attacks can take many forms, including:

  • Phishing (tricking someone into giving up sensitive information)
  • Malware (malicious software like viruses or spyware)
  • Hacking and data breaches (gaining unauthorised access to steal, alter or destroy information)

The impact of this abuse is significant, with high numbers of defenders reporting feelings of fear and anxiety for themselves and their communities. Almost two-thirds of the defenders who responded to our question on the impact of the abuse they suffered say that they have feared for their safety and almost half report a loss of productivity.

This means that there is a real risk that this online abuse is impacting defenders’ campaigning, which impedes progress on climate action and solutions.

Something clearly needs to change, and the platforms on which a lot of this abuse occurs must bear some of the responsibility.

When we dig a little deeper into the data from the survey responses, some disturbing trends emerge.

Activists from Extinction Rebellion march through Berlin dressed as billionaires, including Big Tech CEOs Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg

Activists from Extinction Rebellion march through Berlin dressed as billionaires, including Big Tech CEOs Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg. Sean Gallup / Getty Images

A Facebook problem

Defenders say they receive abuse on Facebook more than any other platform

Globally, Facebook is the platform that the highest number of defenders say they have suffered abuse on. The next most cited platforms for abuse are X and WhatsApp. Instagram is the fourth most common platform on which abuse has occurred.

Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram are all owned by Meta.

These results may in part reflect the popularity of Facebook overall as a platform (it has over 3 billion monthly active users, making it the largest social networking site globally).

Nevertheless, our survey has revealed that 82% of defenders who say they have suffered abuse online say that they have been abused on at least one of Meta’s three platforms.

Based on this data, Meta therefore holds a huge amount of responsibility when it comes to finding ways to address online harms to defenders.

The results shift slightly when comparing responses from different regions. For example, among defenders in Europe almost the same number reported experiencing abuse on X as on Facebook.

According to this survey, X therefore also holds a level of responsibility when it comes to addressing online harms to defenders.

We set out below a selection of first-hand accounts of defenders who agreed to speak with us after completing our survey. These accounts reflect the defenders’ personal experience and are given in the defenders’ own words.

Read the full report at: Global Witness

Continue Reading

NGO WORK

Solidarity statement in support of communities and ILC Africa members in special circumstances.

Published

on

Solidarity statement in support of communities and ILC Africa members in special circumstances. ILC Africa stands in unwavering solidarity with our members and communities who continue to face land injustices and other human rights violations due to forced evictions and land/natural resource-related conflicts in Tanzania, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Kenya. Across Africa, large-scale land acquisitions continue to pose significant challenges, particularly for millions of rural communities who live on and depend on land for their livelihood.

While these land deals are promoted as opportunities for agricultural investment, biodiversity conservation through fortress conservation, and economic growth, they frequently lead to displacement, loss of livelihoods, and social conflicts. This is particularly concerning because many affected communities lack formal land titles, making them vulnerable to dispossession without adequate, fair, and just compensation.

Additionally, weak governance and unclear land tenure systems exacerbate tensions, as foreign investors and governments prioritize commercial interests over the rights of communities. In some cases, these acquisitions have fueled protests and unrest, highlighting the urgent need for transparent policies that protect land rights and ensure equitable development.

Since June 2022, the Maasai communities in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area have faced ongoing uncertainty and fear of displacement from their ancestral lands, as commercial tourism investments threaten their ancestral homes. Repeated instances of violent forced evictions have intensified their plight. Although we acknowledge the steps taken by the Government of Tanzania to facilitate dialogue through the establishment of two presidential commissions tasked with examining the underlying causes of the land crisis in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area and Loliondo, we underscore the importance and need for genuine and inclusive engagements with stakeholders that will result in human rights centred solutions in the interest of the thousands of affected communities.

Similarly, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Rwandan Army’s military occupation of Eastern DRC in early 2025, through the proxy of M23, has thrust local communities, including ILC’s member Union Pour L’emancipation De La Femme Autochtone (UEFA) and the communities they work with, into a state of turmoil and instability. Despite mounting international pressure and emerging diplomatic efforts, Rwanda’s persistent actions appear to be driven by a longstanding interest in exploiting the region’s rare minerals, vast agricultural lands, and securing strategic transport corridors to establish a dominant logistics position in East Africa.

The ongoing conflict in the DRC has inflicted widespread devastation on communities across several regions particularly in South and North Kivu provinces, Mwenga and Shabunda regions, Bitale and Kalonge, Idjwi, Bunyakiri, Bukanga-Lonzo and Maï-Ndombe province among others. This conflict has unleashed a deepening humanitarian crisis marked by widespread displacement, violence, and economic collapse. Communities are grappling with mass exodus, destruction of homes and farmland, and pervasive human rights abuses—including rape, extortion, kidnappings, and murders. Civilian infrastructure has been repurposed or blocked, access to basic services has crumbled, and families are enduring hunger, illness, and extreme overcrowding. Women and children are particularly vulnerable, facing targeted violence and loss of livelihoods. The war, driven by foreign interest in minerals, land, and strategic routes, is tearing apart the social fabric and plunging already fragile populations into greater instability.

In Kenya, the Ogiek people’s fight for justice took a critical turn during a compliance hearing at the AfricanCourt on Human and Peoples’ Rights, reaffirming their rightful ownership of ancestral lands in the Mau Forest and ordering reparations. However, despite past rulings in 2017 and 2022, the Kenyan
government’s continued delays led to renewed suffering. Most devastatingly, in November 2023, over 700
Ogiek were forcibly evicted from Narok County, with homes, schools, and property burned—despite clear court orders forbidding such actions. The community faced severe losses and emotional turmoil, underscoring persistent violations of their rights.Delays in implementation continue to harm lives and disrupt livelihoods, while the ongoing disregard for collective land rights weakens the broader framework
of Indigenous Peoples protections across Africa.

In the face of these multiple adversities, the struggle of these communities is not just for their own survival but also for the preservation of ecosystems and the rights of future generations.

We call on the respective governments, relevant authorities and private actors responsible for the persistent land and natural resource related conflicts and forced evictions to:

  • Immediately and unconditionally ceasefire by all armed actors to halt the violence and protect civilians including land and environmental defenders.
  • Facilitate and create an enabling environment for an inclusive and genuine dialogue with the affected stakeholders that will result in human rights centered solutions to the long standing land and natural resource related forced evictions and conflicts.
  • End all forms of forced evictions including those justified by conservation goals or carbon-credit projects, and respect the rights of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, including women and youth.
  • Respect and enforce court orders from both national and international judicial bodies.Secure the legal recognition of the communal land rights of Indigenous Peoples and Local
    Communities and deliver just through reparations for historical land injustices.
  • Protect land and environmental defenders from violence and persecution and hold perpetrators accountable for human rights violations.
  • Support sustainable and people centered conservation models that prioritize the well-being of local communities.

We call on International and Development Partners to:

  • Support the international advocacy and lobbying efforts of the communities: by amplifying calls for justice and accountability. Coordinated lobbying can help maintain pressure on the Government to uphold commitments to fair land policies and prevent forced displacements.

We call on the civil society to take urgent action:

  • Strengthen the social movement by fostering unity and resilience across all affected areas. This includes mobilizing communities to stand together in opposition to any government directives that threaten land security. A unified stance will enhance the community’s capacity to resist external pressure.
  • In the case of the Maasai of Ngorongoro Conservation Area, we invite the CSOs and other relevant non-state actors to support the on-going Ministerial and Presidential (Through the two Commissions of Inquiry into the land question and the relocation process). Engagement with key government ministries, such as the Ministry of Land, Livestock, Natural Resources, and Tourism, and the Ministry of Local Government. The objective is to ensure these institutions fully understand the root causes of the ongoing crises and are influenced to support just and sustainable solutions.

ILC Africa remains steadfast in its commitment to advocating for justice and fair land governance across the continent, standing with communities in their fight for dignity, land security, and human rights.

Source: International Land Coalition-ILC

Continue Reading

Resource Center

Legal Framework

READ BY CATEGORY

Facebook

Newsletter

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter



Trending

Subscribe to Witness Radio's newsletter