By Herv Kempf
Le Monde
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The planet's ecological future directly depends on the political choices that will be exercised: this observation had never before been clearly spotlighted by a United Nations decision-making body. Now it's done: the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) asserts in a thick report, the so-called "GEO 4", published Thursday October 25, that generalized privatization of resources and services would be the worst scenario from an environmental perspective.
That's the conclusion of an original approach to possible futures that a group of international experts has been conducting the last two years: it models each scenario as a function of the type of policies put into place. The point of departure for this modeling effort is the major ecological crisis, which the planet is already experiencing.
By actualizing the description through numerous sources, the UNEP report synthesizes changes in climate, biodiversity, soils' health, water resources ... It highlights the shrinkage in available resources per inhabitant, with the available earth surface for each human being going from 7.91 hectares in 1900 to 2.02 hectares in 2005.
The rapidity of the phenomenon is emphasized: the breadth and the composition of terrestrial ecosystems that "are being modified by populations at an unprecedented speed." The experts insist on the concept of a threshold: "The cumulative effects of the continuous changes in the environment may reach thresholds that will manifest themselves as abrupt and irreversible changes." This idea of "tipping points" is applicable not only to climate change, but also to the phenomena of desertification, drops in water tables, collapse of ecosystems, etc.
Tipping Points
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Thursday, November 15, 2007
How the World Bank is failing to deliver real change on conditionality
In 2005 the World Bank launched a review of its conditionality policy. This was in response to growing international criticism, from developed and developing countries alike, that the World Bank was still attaching too many intrusive and, at times, harmful economic policy conditions to its development finance to poor countries.
Two years on from this important step, the World Bank is keen to represent the problem of conditionality as one that has been dealt with, and that is no longer a major problem in lending. In order to independently assess whether or not this is the case, this report, by the European Network on Debt and Development (Eurodad), assesses the effectiveness of the World Bank’s Good Practice Principles (GPPs) in reforming World Bank conditionality.
The report finds that the GPPs have, as hoped, had a positive impact in reducing the overall number of conditions that the World Bank attaches to its development finance in poor countries. However, unfortunately there has been very limited progress in curbing the Bank’s practice of attaching sensitive economic policy conditions like privatisation and liberalisation conditions to its lending.
Click here; to read more
Two years on from this important step, the World Bank is keen to represent the problem of conditionality as one that has been dealt with, and that is no longer a major problem in lending. In order to independently assess whether or not this is the case, this report, by the European Network on Debt and Development (Eurodad), assesses the effectiveness of the World Bank’s Good Practice Principles (GPPs) in reforming World Bank conditionality.
The report finds that the GPPs have, as hoped, had a positive impact in reducing the overall number of conditions that the World Bank attaches to its development finance in poor countries. However, unfortunately there has been very limited progress in curbing the Bank’s practice of attaching sensitive economic policy conditions like privatisation and liberalisation conditions to its lending.
Click here; to read more
Monday, November 12, 2007
WATER IS OUR RIGHT – NOT A PRIVILEGE!
Water is essential to life, is best protected by local communities and citizens, and not by private companies. And therefore we must protest the potential monopolization of our source of life and behold our constitutional right
By: Vikas Adhyayan Kendra
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHY SHOULD WE OPPOSE THE SETTING UP OF PREPAID WATER METERS
·Prepaid water meters pave the way for privatization
The World Bank’s constant use of the term cost recovery and private sector participation lays down the conditions in their lending policies. This reduces the already difficult access and affordability of clean water thus promoting the interference of water companies. Prepaid water meters are simply a tool used under private contract in order to secure profits for the shareholders, not the access to water for the users.
·Prepaid water meters changes the demand responsive nature of water management
With the possibility that one’s access to water will get cut off as soon as one cannot pay, the demand for water goes down as people will buy only how much they can really afford. This results in use of untreated water, which has further consequences on the health and hygiene of persons. It also reduces the interface that exists between the government and the consumers of water. The consumers have no mechanism to be able to address their concerns about loss of access to water once they run out of money to be able to pay for it.
·Prepaid water meters undermine public health
One is forced into making difficult trade offs between water, food, medicine, school fees, transport and other essential goods and services. Hence, all the gains that are supposed to be achieved through access to regular clean water is totally undermined as slum dwellers will have to look for alternative sources of water, which most likely will be polluted
·Are Prepaid water meters really cost effective
Despite potential management savings prepaid water meters are provided at a higher rate for users as compared to traditional billing system as these meters are high technology solutions, hence the private players will also have to recover their costs in installing and operating them
·Prepaid water meters will only widen the inequalities that exist
Water becomes an individualized marketed commodity thus eroding the social relations between families in the communities where these prepaid water meters will be set up. The shared burden of access to water is lost. These meters are provided only in areas that are poor thus securing payment from people who already have a difficulty to pay for the most basic things. The women and children are forced to go back to their traditional role of water carriers. Hence, progress hoped to achieve in gender gains and education for children is all lost.
·It violates our fundamental right to water
The human right to water has been guaranteed in our constitution and also through international covenants set up by the United Nations now. It is the responsibility of the government to provide its citizens with free access to potable water. Water is equivalent to our right to life
Private companies and the World Bank have repeatedly tried to say that all consumers have the willingness to pay for clean water. However, this is true only in the case of the people who have the ability to pay. Is this the case for the poor living in slum areas too? This argument abuses the fact that all human beings need water for basic survival. Instead these decision makers must start analyzing the ability to pay. Households should not be forced to give up food in order to buy water.
By: Vikas Adhyayan Kendra
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHY SHOULD WE OPPOSE THE SETTING UP OF PREPAID WATER METERS
·Prepaid water meters pave the way for privatization
The World Bank’s constant use of the term cost recovery and private sector participation lays down the conditions in their lending policies. This reduces the already difficult access and affordability of clean water thus promoting the interference of water companies. Prepaid water meters are simply a tool used under private contract in order to secure profits for the shareholders, not the access to water for the users.
·Prepaid water meters changes the demand responsive nature of water management
With the possibility that one’s access to water will get cut off as soon as one cannot pay, the demand for water goes down as people will buy only how much they can really afford. This results in use of untreated water, which has further consequences on the health and hygiene of persons. It also reduces the interface that exists between the government and the consumers of water. The consumers have no mechanism to be able to address their concerns about loss of access to water once they run out of money to be able to pay for it.
·Prepaid water meters undermine public health
One is forced into making difficult trade offs between water, food, medicine, school fees, transport and other essential goods and services. Hence, all the gains that are supposed to be achieved through access to regular clean water is totally undermined as slum dwellers will have to look for alternative sources of water, which most likely will be polluted
·Are Prepaid water meters really cost effective
Despite potential management savings prepaid water meters are provided at a higher rate for users as compared to traditional billing system as these meters are high technology solutions, hence the private players will also have to recover their costs in installing and operating them
·Prepaid water meters will only widen the inequalities that exist
Water becomes an individualized marketed commodity thus eroding the social relations between families in the communities where these prepaid water meters will be set up. The shared burden of access to water is lost. These meters are provided only in areas that are poor thus securing payment from people who already have a difficulty to pay for the most basic things. The women and children are forced to go back to their traditional role of water carriers. Hence, progress hoped to achieve in gender gains and education for children is all lost.
·It violates our fundamental right to water
The human right to water has been guaranteed in our constitution and also through international covenants set up by the United Nations now. It is the responsibility of the government to provide its citizens with free access to potable water. Water is equivalent to our right to life
Private companies and the World Bank have repeatedly tried to say that all consumers have the willingness to pay for clean water. However, this is true only in the case of the people who have the ability to pay. Is this the case for the poor living in slum areas too? This argument abuses the fact that all human beings need water for basic survival. Instead these decision makers must start analyzing the ability to pay. Households should not be forced to give up food in order to buy water.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Time to say no to WB conditionalities
The World Bank president, Robert Zoellick, during his two-day visit of
Bangladesh, which ended Sunday evening, said loan conditionalities –
one of the major reasons of discontent across the world – were in fact
needed to ensure that the bank's was not 'stolen'. He insisted that
procurement regulations had to be followed by way of examples. This
was quite evidently to counter the suggestions of civil society
representatives who had met Zoellick during his visit. Civil society
has rightly questioned the necessity of lending agency funds being
pegged with conditionalities as these are seen to have a debilitating
effect on the economy while it erodes and in fact undermines the
government's sovereignty in policymaking. It has been a long standing
demand of activists and a large section of academics that the
adherence to certain prescriptions should not be the basis for
receiving lending agency funds. Instead the basis should be
achievement of certain development indicators such as disparity,
literacy, calorie intake, and child mortality.
As such, it is demanded that the lending agencies allow their clients
a free hand in developing their own policies with meaningful public
involvement which is the only means to ensure complete ownership of
the development strategy. It would then be more useful and effective
than coercing countries to formulate their poverty reduction strategy
'guided' by the lending agencies and authored by quarters faithful to
the preferred to school of neoliberal economics dictating free market,
liberalisation and privatisation. We stress that it should not be the
concern of the lending agencies whether the school or the hospital is
under private ownership or run by the state as long as the students
are educated and patients cured.
Read more, click here
Bangladesh, which ended Sunday evening, said loan conditionalities –
one of the major reasons of discontent across the world – were in fact
needed to ensure that the bank's was not 'stolen'. He insisted that
procurement regulations had to be followed by way of examples. This
was quite evidently to counter the suggestions of civil society
representatives who had met Zoellick during his visit. Civil society
has rightly questioned the necessity of lending agency funds being
pegged with conditionalities as these are seen to have a debilitating
effect on the economy while it erodes and in fact undermines the
government's sovereignty in policymaking. It has been a long standing
demand of activists and a large section of academics that the
adherence to certain prescriptions should not be the basis for
receiving lending agency funds. Instead the basis should be
achievement of certain development indicators such as disparity,
literacy, calorie intake, and child mortality.
As such, it is demanded that the lending agencies allow their clients
a free hand in developing their own policies with meaningful public
involvement which is the only means to ensure complete ownership of
the development strategy. It would then be more useful and effective
than coercing countries to formulate their poverty reduction strategy
'guided' by the lending agencies and authored by quarters faithful to
the preferred to school of neoliberal economics dictating free market,
liberalisation and privatisation. We stress that it should not be the
concern of the lending agencies whether the school or the hospital is
under private ownership or run by the state as long as the students
are educated and patients cured.
Read more, click here
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
India & China influential countries says World Bank
The head of the World Bank says China and India are both playing big and influential roles in formulating policies despite the two countries being under-represented when it comes to formal bank voting rights.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
World Bank Chief Praises Indian, Chinese Influence in Top Funding Agencies
In his first trip to South Asia since being named president of the World Bank, former U.S. trade representative Robert Zoellick is calling for India and China to take a larger role in the multi-national funding agency. He is rebutting criticism that the two largest nations need additional voting rights in the bank and at the International Monetary Fund to have commensurate clout with the United States, Japan and European stakeholders.
When the Indian and Chinese executive directors speak up, regardless of the formal votes - because not many things are done in formal votes in those institutions - they're listened to because they're representing big and influential countries," he said. "And I think that's a good thing. And that's one reason why I've taken a different approach than some suggested and remain a good partner with China and India."
Zoellick says fighting theft of funds is also on his agenda.
Read more; click here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
World Bank Chief Praises Indian, Chinese Influence in Top Funding Agencies
In his first trip to South Asia since being named president of the World Bank, former U.S. trade representative Robert Zoellick is calling for India and China to take a larger role in the multi-national funding agency. He is rebutting criticism that the two largest nations need additional voting rights in the bank and at the International Monetary Fund to have commensurate clout with the United States, Japan and European stakeholders.
When the Indian and Chinese executive directors speak up, regardless of the formal votes - because not many things are done in formal votes in those institutions - they're listened to because they're representing big and influential countries," he said. "And I think that's a good thing. And that's one reason why I've taken a different approach than some suggested and remain a good partner with China and India."
Zoellick says fighting theft of funds is also on his agenda.
Read more; click here.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Deconstructing Knowledge Hegemony of the World Bank
By Tanim Ahmed*, NewAge, November 5, 2007. Dhaka, Bangladesh
http://banglapraxis.wordpress.com/2007/11/05/deconstructing-knowledge-hegemony/
IT IS only natural that, after the publication of the World Bank’s flagship annual World Development Report on agriculture, its president would indicate the bank’s interest to be more involved in the sector. The finance and commerce adviser to the military-driven interim government, AB Mirza Azizul Islam, said as much at a press briefing that followed his meeting with Robert B Zoellick on Saturday. The intended involvement would understandably hinge on the findings, recommendations and conclusions of the development report that provide valuable pointers to the direction that the multilateral lending agency would like to pursue.
There is little doubt that agriculture remains the most crucial sector in developing countries, which, needless to say, are agriculture-based economies and typically have the largest segments of their populations engaged in the sector. In the case of Bangladesh, agriculture currently contributes just over a fifth of the GDP but employs over half the labour force. At least a third of the population is dependent on this sector for their livelihoods. Since most of the rural poor, who are among the most marginalised and deprived, are engaged in agriculture, it is intuitively posited that a sustainable agriculture which is profitable would benefit them and contribute to reduction of poverty and the ever-widening disparity. It would, however, be important to ascertain how exactly investment in agriculture would lead to poverty reduction and human development. The development report does not touch upon the issue and suggests that any improvement of agricultural commerce, in whatever form or mode, would lead to poverty reduction, without clearly establishing the link between agricultural growth, suggested mode of innovation and transformation and poverty reduction.
Most controversial is perhaps the unquestioning support to fully exploit the benefits of biotechnology and genetically modified organisms that the development report provides. To strengthen its case the report draws upon the experience of Bt cotton without mentioning the devastating effect it has had on the livelihoods of thousands of farmers in India. The Deccan Development Society, which works with grassroots farmers, has convinced the government of Andhra Pradesh, an Indian province where farmers had been the worst hit, to kick out Monsanto that had developed and marketed the seeds of Bt cotton. There were reports of angry farmers vandalising the local offices of the biotech multinational. None of it was mentioned in the report, though.
Such omissions, however glaring or minute, which contradict a foregone conclusion, as internal reviews and external research prove, are largely by design rather than by default. The nagging suspicion among the critics of the multilateral lending agencies that their research was not entirely reliable became all the stronger when Joseph Stiglitz had to leave his position of the chief economist of the World Bank, which also claims to be the world’s knowledge bank, after a difference of opinion with the US Treasury about the contents of another World Development Report, Attacking Poverty, in 2000. That report turned out to be one that had been used for several years to decide upon the right policies for poverty reduction. There have been several other untimely exits of senior researchers who did not quite toe the line, including William Easterly and Ravi Kanbur.
Robin Broad’s article on how the World Bank ensured ‘paradigm maintenance’ through its research was a severe blow to the credibility of this bank’s research. ‘Research, Knowledge, and the Art of “Paradigm Maintenance”: The World Bank’s Development Economics Vice-Presidency (DEC)’ was published in the Review of International Political Economy in August 2006. Broad, a professor at the School of International Service at American University, concluded, after a ‘look inside’ the department concerned and two dozen interviews of current and former staff of the bank, that ‘through its research, the World Bank has played a critical role in the legitimisation of the neo-liberal free-market paradigm over the past quarter century and its research department has been vital to this role. As activists working on the World Bank explore which parts of the Bank should be eliminated or reformed, they should look closely at the Bank’s research department as well as its external affairs department which disseminates broadly this less than objective research.’
She refers to the much-cited work of David Dollar that apparently ‘exemplifies the “paradigm-maintenance” role.’ It basically posited that it was empirically proved that countries committed to liberalisation, privatisation and the free market — in others words, the firm believers of the Washington Consensus — achieved higher growth than those who were averse to globalisation and the free market. Broad describes six mechanisms – hiring, promotion, selective application of rules, discouraging dissenting views and manipulation of data – by which the development economics vice-presidency performed in the role of perpetuating the imperialist hegemony.
Soon after came the damning blow by way of an internal evaluation of the World Bank’s research between 1998 and 2005 headed by Angus Deaton, a professor of economics at Princeton University. This evaluation slated two articles by Dollar, including the one that Broad discusses, as being flawed and concluded that the lending agency had placed undue importance on just one paper to advocate policy setting. The other paper that this panel criticised was one which concluded that aid is more effective in countries with good policies. Through interviews of previous and current staff of the World Bank the panel found that research which challenged the agency’s goals or operations was actively discouraged and subjected to endless reviews. The panellists also said conclusions of some of its flagship publications, such as the World Development Report, were negotiated earlier and the entire exercise was conducted to prove those conclusions. The panel rightly observed that these publications, although based on flawed research, were disseminated by the World Bank with much zeal and enthusiasm and have a direct bearing on decisions that policymakers take across the world. Its publications go on to form the opinion of an inordinately large number of development practitioners, bureaucrats and politicians who would then sincerely act as tools that further agency’s agenda on their own.
When Mirza Aziz was asked about the people’s tribunal on Saturday on the lending agencies — announced on the same day as the arrival of Zoellick — he pointed out that these organisations provided almost half of the development budget. His questioning manner suggested that the finance adviser would only be convinced with robust analyses of the economic effect of halving the development programmes of the government. One, however, wonders if he had the same attitude during his meeting with Zoellick or Thomas Rumbaugh when the IMF delegation visited Bangladesh in September. It is painfully clear that the finance adviser and his colleagues running the government would unquestioningly abide by a certain agricultural policy that the World Bank suggests despite the contradictory opinion from local economists and experts as they have in the case of the precautionary monetary policy prescribed by the International Monetary Fund. Surely, Mirza Aziz did not ask for a robust analysis of the agency’s conclusion.
Furthermore, to maintain this intellectual hegemony, the World Bank has begun to produce a far higher number of publications on development and poverty reduction since the introduction of the poverty reduction strategy paper. Besides providing the guideline for its preparation, the World Bank ensures that its agenda is fully reflected by the ‘home grown’ poverty reduction strategy by ensuring that an academic who is within its fold is charged with authoring the report. The volumes of publications are merely pointers of how to devise development policies.
While the poverty reduction strategy of Bangladesh is supposedly ‘home grown’ and while the decisions to privatise public sector jute mills or increase of fuel prices were also taken by the incumbents, they typically resemble exactly what those agencies had prescribed or would have prescribed. Although there are numerous studies, research and practical examples from other countries that have industrialised and developed by not following the prescriptions of the lending agencies, decision makers hardly take them into cognisance.
That the international financial institutions only look to further the corporate interests of large multinationals based in countries that drive these agencies has been pointed out repeatedly. For instance the Asian Development Bank provides funds for infrastructure, roads and highways because it would only increase the demand for cars in Bangladesh. Provided that an overwhelming proportion of the cars in Bangladesh are manufactured by Japanese companies, Japan would naturally be interested in helping such a market to build more roads.
Although the WB president appointment is typically linked with the foreign policy interests of the lending agency, such matters are hardly questioned around the world. It is due to the hegemony of knowledge that these agencies together create and perpetuate through the popular media.
One of the goals of the People’s Tribunal on WB-IMF-ADB is to point these out and create a general awareness among the people so that they raise such questions. It is this myth of omnipotence in development research that the tribunal would want to deconstruct through presentation of cases with exhaustive and convincing evidence as was mentioned during its announcement. People in other parts of the world are increasingly questioning these lending agencies. They are being rejected from Latin America after years of persecution through the neo-liberalist paradigm that eventually ensure annihilation of the marginalised communities and prevalence of large capital increasing disparity, which is quite visible in Bangladesh too. These agencies are faced with strong opposition in East Asia where countries engage in serious negotiations. The IMF prescriptions have already elicited an unprecedented note of protest from the top business bodies and chambers of commerce in Bangladesh. Organisers of the tribunal rightly believe it is time to send a clear message that the policies imposed upon the government will be questioned and challenged.
*Tanim Ahmed can be reached at: tanimahmed@gmail.com
http://banglapraxis.wordpress.com/2007/11/05/deconstructing-knowledge-hegemony/
IT IS only natural that, after the publication of the World Bank’s flagship annual World Development Report on agriculture, its president would indicate the bank’s interest to be more involved in the sector. The finance and commerce adviser to the military-driven interim government, AB Mirza Azizul Islam, said as much at a press briefing that followed his meeting with Robert B Zoellick on Saturday. The intended involvement would understandably hinge on the findings, recommendations and conclusions of the development report that provide valuable pointers to the direction that the multilateral lending agency would like to pursue.
There is little doubt that agriculture remains the most crucial sector in developing countries, which, needless to say, are agriculture-based economies and typically have the largest segments of their populations engaged in the sector. In the case of Bangladesh, agriculture currently contributes just over a fifth of the GDP but employs over half the labour force. At least a third of the population is dependent on this sector for their livelihoods. Since most of the rural poor, who are among the most marginalised and deprived, are engaged in agriculture, it is intuitively posited that a sustainable agriculture which is profitable would benefit them and contribute to reduction of poverty and the ever-widening disparity. It would, however, be important to ascertain how exactly investment in agriculture would lead to poverty reduction and human development. The development report does not touch upon the issue and suggests that any improvement of agricultural commerce, in whatever form or mode, would lead to poverty reduction, without clearly establishing the link between agricultural growth, suggested mode of innovation and transformation and poverty reduction.
Most controversial is perhaps the unquestioning support to fully exploit the benefits of biotechnology and genetically modified organisms that the development report provides. To strengthen its case the report draws upon the experience of Bt cotton without mentioning the devastating effect it has had on the livelihoods of thousands of farmers in India. The Deccan Development Society, which works with grassroots farmers, has convinced the government of Andhra Pradesh, an Indian province where farmers had been the worst hit, to kick out Monsanto that had developed and marketed the seeds of Bt cotton. There were reports of angry farmers vandalising the local offices of the biotech multinational. None of it was mentioned in the report, though.
Such omissions, however glaring or minute, which contradict a foregone conclusion, as internal reviews and external research prove, are largely by design rather than by default. The nagging suspicion among the critics of the multilateral lending agencies that their research was not entirely reliable became all the stronger when Joseph Stiglitz had to leave his position of the chief economist of the World Bank, which also claims to be the world’s knowledge bank, after a difference of opinion with the US Treasury about the contents of another World Development Report, Attacking Poverty, in 2000. That report turned out to be one that had been used for several years to decide upon the right policies for poverty reduction. There have been several other untimely exits of senior researchers who did not quite toe the line, including William Easterly and Ravi Kanbur.
Robin Broad’s article on how the World Bank ensured ‘paradigm maintenance’ through its research was a severe blow to the credibility of this bank’s research. ‘Research, Knowledge, and the Art of “Paradigm Maintenance”: The World Bank’s Development Economics Vice-Presidency (DEC)’ was published in the Review of International Political Economy in August 2006. Broad, a professor at the School of International Service at American University, concluded, after a ‘look inside’ the department concerned and two dozen interviews of current and former staff of the bank, that ‘through its research, the World Bank has played a critical role in the legitimisation of the neo-liberal free-market paradigm over the past quarter century and its research department has been vital to this role. As activists working on the World Bank explore which parts of the Bank should be eliminated or reformed, they should look closely at the Bank’s research department as well as its external affairs department which disseminates broadly this less than objective research.’
She refers to the much-cited work of David Dollar that apparently ‘exemplifies the “paradigm-maintenance” role.’ It basically posited that it was empirically proved that countries committed to liberalisation, privatisation and the free market — in others words, the firm believers of the Washington Consensus — achieved higher growth than those who were averse to globalisation and the free market. Broad describes six mechanisms – hiring, promotion, selective application of rules, discouraging dissenting views and manipulation of data – by which the development economics vice-presidency performed in the role of perpetuating the imperialist hegemony.
Soon after came the damning blow by way of an internal evaluation of the World Bank’s research between 1998 and 2005 headed by Angus Deaton, a professor of economics at Princeton University. This evaluation slated two articles by Dollar, including the one that Broad discusses, as being flawed and concluded that the lending agency had placed undue importance on just one paper to advocate policy setting. The other paper that this panel criticised was one which concluded that aid is more effective in countries with good policies. Through interviews of previous and current staff of the World Bank the panel found that research which challenged the agency’s goals or operations was actively discouraged and subjected to endless reviews. The panellists also said conclusions of some of its flagship publications, such as the World Development Report, were negotiated earlier and the entire exercise was conducted to prove those conclusions. The panel rightly observed that these publications, although based on flawed research, were disseminated by the World Bank with much zeal and enthusiasm and have a direct bearing on decisions that policymakers take across the world. Its publications go on to form the opinion of an inordinately large number of development practitioners, bureaucrats and politicians who would then sincerely act as tools that further agency’s agenda on their own.
When Mirza Aziz was asked about the people’s tribunal on Saturday on the lending agencies — announced on the same day as the arrival of Zoellick — he pointed out that these organisations provided almost half of the development budget. His questioning manner suggested that the finance adviser would only be convinced with robust analyses of the economic effect of halving the development programmes of the government. One, however, wonders if he had the same attitude during his meeting with Zoellick or Thomas Rumbaugh when the IMF delegation visited Bangladesh in September. It is painfully clear that the finance adviser and his colleagues running the government would unquestioningly abide by a certain agricultural policy that the World Bank suggests despite the contradictory opinion from local economists and experts as they have in the case of the precautionary monetary policy prescribed by the International Monetary Fund. Surely, Mirza Aziz did not ask for a robust analysis of the agency’s conclusion.
Furthermore, to maintain this intellectual hegemony, the World Bank has begun to produce a far higher number of publications on development and poverty reduction since the introduction of the poverty reduction strategy paper. Besides providing the guideline for its preparation, the World Bank ensures that its agenda is fully reflected by the ‘home grown’ poverty reduction strategy by ensuring that an academic who is within its fold is charged with authoring the report. The volumes of publications are merely pointers of how to devise development policies.
While the poverty reduction strategy of Bangladesh is supposedly ‘home grown’ and while the decisions to privatise public sector jute mills or increase of fuel prices were also taken by the incumbents, they typically resemble exactly what those agencies had prescribed or would have prescribed. Although there are numerous studies, research and practical examples from other countries that have industrialised and developed by not following the prescriptions of the lending agencies, decision makers hardly take them into cognisance.
That the international financial institutions only look to further the corporate interests of large multinationals based in countries that drive these agencies has been pointed out repeatedly. For instance the Asian Development Bank provides funds for infrastructure, roads and highways because it would only increase the demand for cars in Bangladesh. Provided that an overwhelming proportion of the cars in Bangladesh are manufactured by Japanese companies, Japan would naturally be interested in helping such a market to build more roads.
Although the WB president appointment is typically linked with the foreign policy interests of the lending agency, such matters are hardly questioned around the world. It is due to the hegemony of knowledge that these agencies together create and perpetuate through the popular media.
One of the goals of the People’s Tribunal on WB-IMF-ADB is to point these out and create a general awareness among the people so that they raise such questions. It is this myth of omnipotence in development research that the tribunal would want to deconstruct through presentation of cases with exhaustive and convincing evidence as was mentioned during its announcement. People in other parts of the world are increasingly questioning these lending agencies. They are being rejected from Latin America after years of persecution through the neo-liberalist paradigm that eventually ensure annihilation of the marginalised communities and prevalence of large capital increasing disparity, which is quite visible in Bangladesh too. These agencies are faced with strong opposition in East Asia where countries engage in serious negotiations. The IMF prescriptions have already elicited an unprecedented note of protest from the top business bodies and chambers of commerce in Bangladesh. Organisers of the tribunal rightly believe it is time to send a clear message that the policies imposed upon the government will be questioned and challenged.
*Tanim Ahmed can be reached at: tanimahmed@gmail.com
Sunday, November 4, 2007
World Bank Cuts Aid to Iran
According to the New York Times, the World Bank has suspended $5.4 million in earthquake and other humanitarian aid to Iran due to US Sanctions. Fettered by processes in the United Nations, the US has used its special leverage in the World Bank to impose its will on the Iranian nation. Additionally, the US has barred US dollar transactions with the four largest Iranian banks, in its crackdown on the nation, impacting the World Bank's ability to find other sources for its projects.
For more information on the US role in WB policy in Iran see:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/world/middleeast/04sanctions.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin
For more information on the US role in WB policy in Iran see:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/world/middleeast/04sanctions.html?_r=1&ref=us&oref=slogin
People’s Tribunal against WB, IMF, ADB announced in Bangladesh
NewAge, November 4, 2007. Dhaka, Bangladesh
Academics, economists, politicians and activists jointly announced the formation of a people’s tribunal against the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the Asian Development Bank on Sunday.
The announcement was made at a press briefing at the National Press Club in Dhaka, a few hours before the arrival of the World Bank president, Robert Zoellick.The tribunal’s national preparatory committee was convened after former justice, Golam Rabbani, announced its formation.
Anu Muhammad, professor of economics at Jahangirnagar University, briefly outlined the plan of action while presenting the concept note. He said in the next six months there will be investigations into the effects that the lending agencies have had on various sectors including jute, water, power and energy, health, education and agriculture.
These investigations will then be used to build up cases against the agencies at the tribunal which will be headed by former justices. He said the investigative process would naturally be as inclusive as possible and the tribunal would try to involve people from the entire cross-section of society.
The people’s committee would include researchers, economists, educationists, politicians and members of various professional bodies.
‘The policy prescriptions of the lending agencies have destroyed Bangladesh’s potential for development and are merely another form of colonisation. The People’s Tribunal will try to find the ways and means of breaking the shackles that the lending agencies have wrapped around our country,’ said Anu.
MM Akash, professor of economics at Dhaka University, said, ‘Through the work of the tribunal and the tribunal itself, we want to tell the lending agencies, “this far and no further”. It is time we turned around and resisted them.’
Golam Rabbani, who presided over the briefing, said, ‘This is a fight against capitalist imperialism that the agencies advance on behalf of their masters.’
M Anisur Rahman, a former pro vice-chancellor of Rajshahi University, expressed wholehearted solidarity with the initiative and urged the organisers to ensure that the tribunal is genuinely a people’s tribunal, because the involvement of the general masses was imperative to make it effective and its verdicts heard and regarded by everyone.
KAM Saduddin, a former professor of sociology of Dhaka University, said, ‘It is indeed the people’s demand that such a tribunal should be formed. The instances of secret and confidential agreements between the government and other parties in the name of the people are numerous. This tribunal will be one of the means to bring about some accountability in this regard.’
Faiz Ahmed, a noted journalist and writer, said although such an initiative could have been taken earlier, it is never too late. ‘We understand the harmfulness of the ill-motivated lending agencies. And the People’s Tribunal is only the outcome of that awareness.’
A number of noted citizens and intellectuals have expressed solidarity with the tribunal and agreed to be a part of it. They include Habibur Rahman, a former chief justice and also a former chief adviser of a caretaker government, Serajul Islam Chowdhury, a professor of English of Dhaka University, and Professor Muzaffar Ahmad, a former teacher of economics who is currently the chairman of Transparency International’s Bangladesh chapter. The tribunal also enjoys the support of a large number of progressive and left-leaning political organisations, business quarters, non-governmental organisations and intellectuals.
Source link: http://banglapraxis.wordpress.com/2007/11/04/people’s-tribunal-against-wb-imf-adb-announced-in-bangladesh/
Academics, economists, politicians and activists jointly announced the formation of a people’s tribunal against the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the Asian Development Bank on Sunday.
The announcement was made at a press briefing at the National Press Club in Dhaka, a few hours before the arrival of the World Bank president, Robert Zoellick.The tribunal’s national preparatory committee was convened after former justice, Golam Rabbani, announced its formation.
Anu Muhammad, professor of economics at Jahangirnagar University, briefly outlined the plan of action while presenting the concept note. He said in the next six months there will be investigations into the effects that the lending agencies have had on various sectors including jute, water, power and energy, health, education and agriculture.
These investigations will then be used to build up cases against the agencies at the tribunal which will be headed by former justices. He said the investigative process would naturally be as inclusive as possible and the tribunal would try to involve people from the entire cross-section of society.
The people’s committee would include researchers, economists, educationists, politicians and members of various professional bodies.
‘The policy prescriptions of the lending agencies have destroyed Bangladesh’s potential for development and are merely another form of colonisation. The People’s Tribunal will try to find the ways and means of breaking the shackles that the lending agencies have wrapped around our country,’ said Anu.
MM Akash, professor of economics at Dhaka University, said, ‘Through the work of the tribunal and the tribunal itself, we want to tell the lending agencies, “this far and no further”. It is time we turned around and resisted them.’
Golam Rabbani, who presided over the briefing, said, ‘This is a fight against capitalist imperialism that the agencies advance on behalf of their masters.’
M Anisur Rahman, a former pro vice-chancellor of Rajshahi University, expressed wholehearted solidarity with the initiative and urged the organisers to ensure that the tribunal is genuinely a people’s tribunal, because the involvement of the general masses was imperative to make it effective and its verdicts heard and regarded by everyone.
KAM Saduddin, a former professor of sociology of Dhaka University, said, ‘It is indeed the people’s demand that such a tribunal should be formed. The instances of secret and confidential agreements between the government and other parties in the name of the people are numerous. This tribunal will be one of the means to bring about some accountability in this regard.’
Faiz Ahmed, a noted journalist and writer, said although such an initiative could have been taken earlier, it is never too late. ‘We understand the harmfulness of the ill-motivated lending agencies. And the People’s Tribunal is only the outcome of that awareness.’
A number of noted citizens and intellectuals have expressed solidarity with the tribunal and agreed to be a part of it. They include Habibur Rahman, a former chief justice and also a former chief adviser of a caretaker government, Serajul Islam Chowdhury, a professor of English of Dhaka University, and Professor Muzaffar Ahmad, a former teacher of economics who is currently the chairman of Transparency International’s Bangladesh chapter. The tribunal also enjoys the support of a large number of progressive and left-leaning political organisations, business quarters, non-governmental organisations and intellectuals.
Source link: http://banglapraxis.wordpress.com/2007/11/04/people’s-tribunal-against-wb-imf-adb-announced-in-bangladesh/
Saturday, November 3, 2007
New loan worth $944 million dollar to India
India in the past has borrowed $ 51982854096* from World Bank for various projects, do we still need more?
* (source : World Bank)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The World Bank on Friday inked three loan agreements with India for a total sanction of $944 million for strengthening the rural finance system, vocational training programmes and community-based water management projects.
According to the agreements signed here, the multilateral agency would provide $ 600 million for boosting rural cooperative credit projects, $ 280 million for supporting 400 ITIs over four years and $ 64 million for water tank management projects in Karnataka.
The agreements were inked by Finance Ministry Joint Secretary Madhusudan Prasad and World Bank Country Director Isabel Guerrero in the presence of Finance Minister P. Chidambaram and World Bank President Robert B. Zoellick, who is on a three-day visit to India. “The three projects, signed on Friday, reflect the Central Government’s priority in rejuvenating the rural economy,” Mr. Chidambaram said on the occasion.
Read more, click here
* (source : World Bank)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The World Bank on Friday inked three loan agreements with India for a total sanction of $944 million for strengthening the rural finance system, vocational training programmes and community-based water management projects.
According to the agreements signed here, the multilateral agency would provide $ 600 million for boosting rural cooperative credit projects, $ 280 million for supporting 400 ITIs over four years and $ 64 million for water tank management projects in Karnataka.
The agreements were inked by Finance Ministry Joint Secretary Madhusudan Prasad and World Bank Country Director Isabel Guerrero in the presence of Finance Minister P. Chidambaram and World Bank President Robert B. Zoellick, who is on a three-day visit to India. “The three projects, signed on Friday, reflect the Central Government’s priority in rejuvenating the rural economy,” Mr. Chidambaram said on the occasion.
Read more, click here
Friday, November 2, 2007
World Bank assures more debt to Maharashtra (India)
The Maharashtra Goverment plans to make Mumbai a metropolis city by taking loan from the World Bank.
Read the following report
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
World Bank assures to consider more loans to Maharashtra
World Bank on Thursday assured Maharashtra government that it would consider granting loans for its various projects like transformation of Mumbai and building infrastructure in the state.
World Bank President Robert B Zoellick gave this assurance after the government sought financial assistance from the Bank to the tune of USD six billion for the development of Mumbai Metropolitan Region.
The government has prepared a business plan of USD 60 billion which was presented before the World Bank group. The government made a presentation before the World Bank group outlining the vision of Mumbai in the presence of chief minister Vilasrao Deshmukh at his official residence Varsha. The presentation described how it wants to transform Mumbai into a world class metropolis with a vibrant economy and a globally comparable quality of life for all its citizens.
The areas where the assistance was sought in the state included enhancing irrigation potential, development of modern urban infrastructure, provision of sustainable drinking water, strengthening and expanding rural health infrastructure etc.
Read the following report
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
World Bank assures to consider more loans to Maharashtra
World Bank on Thursday assured Maharashtra government that it would consider granting loans for its various projects like transformation of Mumbai and building infrastructure in the state.
World Bank President Robert B Zoellick gave this assurance after the government sought financial assistance from the Bank to the tune of USD six billion for the development of Mumbai Metropolitan Region.
The government has prepared a business plan of USD 60 billion which was presented before the World Bank group. The government made a presentation before the World Bank group outlining the vision of Mumbai in the presence of chief minister Vilasrao Deshmukh at his official residence Varsha. The presentation described how it wants to transform Mumbai into a world class metropolis with a vibrant economy and a globally comparable quality of life for all its citizens.
The areas where the assistance was sought in the state included enhancing irrigation potential, development of modern urban infrastructure, provision of sustainable drinking water, strengthening and expanding rural health infrastructure etc.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
World Bank Chief Robert Zoellick in India
World Bank's new chief to review the ground realities in India
Will the World Bank continue to support the state agencies despite their tardy implementation of various infrastructure projects in Mumbai? Answer to this question may be found on Thursday when World Bank’s new chief Robert Zoellick comes calling to Mumbai to review the ground realities. The bank has been a major contributor to the city’s biggest-ever comprehensive transport management plan — Mumbai Urban Transport Project (MUTP).
The nearly Rs 5,000-crore project which began in 2002 was designed as a first and urgent step towards improving physical infrastructure in rail and road transportation. Besides MUTP, the state government has a slew of projects lined up for Mumbai which are awaiting funding.
Read in detail, click here
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is the new World Bank chief coming to justify World Bank or to put India in more debt by sanctioning more loans?
Will the World Bank continue to support the state agencies despite their tardy implementation of various infrastructure projects in Mumbai? Answer to this question may be found on Thursday when World Bank’s new chief Robert Zoellick comes calling to Mumbai to review the ground realities. The bank has been a major contributor to the city’s biggest-ever comprehensive transport management plan — Mumbai Urban Transport Project (MUTP).
The nearly Rs 5,000-crore project which began in 2002 was designed as a first and urgent step towards improving physical infrastructure in rail and road transportation. Besides MUTP, the state government has a slew of projects lined up for Mumbai which are awaiting funding.
Read in detail, click here
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is the new World Bank chief coming to justify World Bank or to put India in more debt by sanctioning more loans?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)