On May 3-6, 2026, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) held its Annual Meeting in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. It has been over a decade since the bank last held its Annual Meeting in Central Asia, and a lot has changed since then. The world is not the same as before – with the threat of war, escalating conflicts, widespread human rights violations, rising costs, and impending ecological collapse.
In the last ten years, the ADB has shifted its focus to support climate initiatives in its member countries, with a particular focus on energy projects. In November 2025, the Bank also approved its new Energy Policy, which gives the green light to the extraction of critical minerals, supports so-called false solutions (such as nuclear and waste-to-energy projects), and fails to phase out fossil fuels.
“The Bank is championing destruction of rivers across Asia, by funding hydropower projects like Rogun, without due consideration to the biodiversity and social impacts.”
(Eugene Simonov, Rivers Without Boundaries International Coalition).
While the ADB speaks about “responsible and sustainable practices”, Indigenous Peoples, affected communities, and civil society organizations across the region are sounding the alarm: this new rush toward critical minerals will exacerbate human rights violations and environmental destruction, forcing mining-affected communities to sacrifice their land and resources for the “greater good” amid heightened risks of conflicts and violations (read more in this op-ed).
In the past year alone, the ADB has forwarded a lot of policy changes – both good and bad. In 2026, it started rolling out its new Environmental and Social Framework, so civil society groups across the region will be monitoring how the policy works on the ground. The ADB has publicly stated its commitment to zero tolerance for reprisals, recognizing that communities and defenders are crucial development actors and should safely and meaningfully be involved. It remains to be seen, however, how these commitments will translate into practice.
“Safeguards exist on paper, but are development banks prepared to confront the political realities that prevent those safeguards from functioning in practice?”
(Umida Niyazova, Uzbek Forum for Human Rights)
Civil society is also closely monitoring the Central Asia Regional Economic Corridor (CAREC) project, a major partnership of 11 countries and development partners focused on trade cooperation and economic development. Despite ADB’s commitments on paper, large-scale infrastructure projects, largely in the transport, energy and trade sectors, have been financed by the bank under the CAREC banner, with limited to no engagement with communities and civil society.
“Here at the ADB Annual Meetings we had many meetings on CAREC. It’s a program that will mainly fund infrastructure projects, that risk leading to forced displacement and resettlement. And here in Central Asia we are very concerned about lack of information and lack of consultations.”
(Sukhgerel Dugersuren, OT Watch and Rivers Without Boundaries Mongolia)
Finaly, the ADB is also undertaking the review of its Accountability Mechanism policy. The update will dictate how the bank is taking issues of accountability and remedy, which will define their legacy in the region. Impacted communities and civil society are demanding the bank to strengthen its policy to ensure accessibility and safety for complainants, as well as improved processes and commitments to remedy.
Our engagement at the Annual Meeting
The Coalition attended the ADB Annual Meeting together with several members and partners, to discuss with ADB Executive Directors and other bank representatives specific problematic projects, as well as wider issues related to reprisals, civic space, and the energy policy.
On May 4, we hosted the Civil Society Policy Forum session on “The Impact of Reprisals on Meaningful Consultations, Accountability and the Grievance Processes“. In this interactive panel discussion – organized with the ADB Office of Safeguards and Office of the Special Project Facilitator – we explored:
🔹 Examples of reprisals in the context of ADB-funded projects, and how the chilling effect impacts the way stakeholders can raise their concerns, file complaints and engage with the project.
🔹The role of accountability mechanisms and project teams in safeguarding complainants.
🔹Good practices, policy changes and innovative approaches for preventing retaliation.
🔹CSO perspectives on supporting communities who file complaints and face retaliation, as well as advocating for systemic change.
🔹Client perspectives on good practices and challenges.
Umida Niyazova (founder and director of our Coalition’s member Uzbek Forum for Human Rights) shared a fitting example of how defenders are constantly targeted and there are continuous attempts to limit their participation: despite being officially invited by the Bank, state security services tried to repeatedly prevent her from joining the ADB Annual Meeting for unspecified “security reasons”.
Ensuring safe spaces for communities to meaningfully partake in consultations and development processes is a cornerstone for ADB’s operations. As Umida Niyazova (Uzbek Forum for Human Rights) highlights, “reporting on real conditions does not harm the economy, ignoring them does.” Without the active participation of communities, ADB projects risk doing more harm than good.
As Bruce Dunn (ADB Office of Safeguards) said, “development should not come at the cost of communities and those who speak up”. This is why, in its new Environmental and Social Framework and its commitment on Zero Tolerance for Reprisals, the ADB recognizes the importance of an enabling civic space in the countries where it operates.
However, while commitments are there, the ADB still has many gaps to address, as highlighted by the three human rights defenders who shared their experiences during the session. According to Laisa Bulatale (Fiji Women’s Rights Movement), the bank should suspend projects until harms are addressed and provide safer spaces for women. An Indigenous human rights defender (anonymous for security reasons) stressed how the Bank should pay particular attention to projects in conflict areas, where risks of reprisals are higher, mentioning the example of a community pressured into withdrawing a complaint.
Projects in focus
Rogun hydropower project (Tajikistan)
In Tajikistan, some of the major development banks – including the ADB – are getting involved in financing the controversial Rogun hydroelectric project. This mega dam risks causing major environmental, social and financial impacts in Tajikistan and other countries downstream, with around 60,000 people expected to be displaced.
Read more:
Reko Diq mine (Pakistan)
Major public development banks, including the IFC and ADB, are investing over $3 billion in a copper mining project in Pakistan’s conflict-affected Chagai district. While framed as supporting the clean energy transition due to copper’s role in renewable technologies, the project is criticized as unsustainable, with risks of worsening social tensions, repression of activists, water shortages, and environmental damage in an already militarized and restricted region.
Read more:
Dieng 2 geothermal project (Indonesia)
The ADB is providing a USD 345 million loan for the expansion of the Dieng-2 Geothermal Plant in Wonosobo, Central Java, Indonesia. Impacted communities fear that there would be continued displacement, water shortages, worsening health issues from pollution, biodiversity loss and community conflicts, similarly to what happened with the Dieng-1 project.
Read more
- ADB geothermal debacle in Indonesia (Aksi and NGO Forum on ADB)
Dudhkoshi hydropower project (Nepal)
The ADB has committed a $550 million loan for the 635 MW Dudhkoshi Storage Hydroelectric Project in Nepal and it is leading a consortium of other financiers. The project will affect approximately 6225 Majhis Indigenous Peoples, who risk being displaced and losing their cultural identity, communal traditions, and river-based life. Women, in particular, may face the loss of economic autonomy, social marginalization and increased vulnerability to gender-based violence and patriarchal suppression. The construction will result in flooding of forest and agricultural lands, affecting biodiversity. The project lacks compensation for downstream communities and poses a risk of dam failure due to Nepal’s high seismic activity in Himalayan region.
Read more:
Tanahu hydroelectric project (Nepal)
The 140 MW Tanahu Hydropower Project in Nepal, funded by the ADB, EIB and JICA, faces criticism for causing displacement, damaging livelihoods for the indigenous Magar community, and failing to provide adequate compensation. For many Indigenous communities in the region, the Seti is more than a waterway; it is sacred, woven into their cosmologies, spiritual rituals, and intergenerational practices. Large dams alter the river’s flow and ecology, disrupting not only physical habitats but also intangible
cultural heritage such as sacred sites, ritual use, ancestral narratives, and eco-spiritual relationships, losses that are difficult to quantify yet deeply felt.
Read more:
Waste-to-energy projects
Falsely advertised as a solution to a waste crisis that stems from over production and consumption, waste-to-energy projects not only deter funding from strategies that offer real solutions, but are manifestations of environmental racism. Incinerators are one of the most toxic, expensive, dangerous, and climate-polluting industries. They are also capital intensive and sources of significant long-term debt. Yet, international financial institutions like the Asian Development Bank are a major driver of incinerator projects.
Read more
Articles, reports and resources
- “ADB’s New Approach to Mining Risks Fueling Conflict” (op-ed by Rhoda Viajar, Sukgherel Dugersuren, and Robie Halip)
- “NGO Forum on ADB Flags Risks Following ADB’s Approval of its Amended Energy Policy” (NGO Forum on ADB)
- “Debt, Delays, Dependencies: Why Public Banks Should Not Support Nuclear Power” (Urgewald)
-
Despite its no-coal policy, the ADB continued to support the Jamshoro coal project, which is a huge burden for Pakistan’s economy, people, and ecosystems. Read more in this briefing (Recourse, in collaboration with Alternative Law Collective).
- “Partners in gas: How the ADB’s investment in Clifford Capital continues to support fossil gas in Asia” (NGO Forum on ADB, Trend Asia, CLEAN & Recourse)