(Archived document, may contain errors)
7/1/87 167
THE WORLD BANKS ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTERS
T he World Bank is financing a series of environmental :mistakes
around the Third World. Barber Conable, the Bank's new president
has admitted that there are serio us environmental problems with
current and past bank projects, but insists that the Bank can
reform and avoid the same errors in the future. He has pledged to
increase the staff of environmental experts from the current half
dozen or so to a department of 60 personnel. It is doubtful,
however, that simply adding new-staff will solve a problem that is
inherent in the Bank's "have money, must lend" approach to Third
World development.
Past environmental problems created in part by the Bank include:
** India , where the Bank is providing almost half a billion
dollars for the Narmada Valley Development Project, a massive
scheme that! will dam up India's largest west-flowing river,
forcibly displacing over two million people, flood 900 square
kilometers, and wi p e out 33,000 hectares of India's dwindling
forest cover, including some of the country's best teak and bamboo.
A stuqy by the Indian Council of Science and Technology predicts
that the dam will increase malaria, cholera, viral encephelitis,
goitre, and ot h er water bome diseases. The official Indian
Institute of Science warns that "as much as 40 percent of Narmada
Sagar's command area is likely to become waterlogged unless
extremely careful and widespread measures are taken." ** Brazil,
where the Bank is le n ding $450 million for hydroelectric
projects-- even though then-Bank President A. W. Clausen conceded
in June 1986 that one of the dams is "an ill-conceived project
which has had substantial negative effects on the environment and
on the AmerIndian popula t ion." Hugh H. Foster, U.S. alternate
representative to the Banles Board of Executive Directors,
complains that the loan is "pu@e folly," that it will finance "a
series of environmental disasters," and that "major environmental
questions, to all appearance s , are being swept under the rug.11
** Indonesia, where the Bank has loaned the government over $600
million to remove--sometimes forcibly--several million people from
the densely populated island of Java and resettle them on
comparatively barren islands. This
11transmigration" project makes little or no economic sense, and
pointlessly destroys the environment. The outer islands' soil is
poorly suited for farming. Crop yields often decrease 50 percent
between the first and second year after deforestation. A recent
government of Indonesia report complains that "an unfortunate cycle
of destruction and rehabilitation is becoming
institutionalized."
** Botswana, where Bank projects are helpmig create!desert. Two
livestock projects to promote cattle raising in this southern
Airrican nation have resulted in the deaths of hundreds of
thousands of migratory animals and depressed "the already limited
subsistence capabilities of [Botswana's] poorer- citizen,"
according to a report by two Bank consultants. The Afric a n-based
International Institute for Livestock Development says the project
"has absolutely no chance of working out .... Eighty percent of the
rangeland which is under cattle in Botswana has already been
severely degraded." Why does the Bank get involved in these
projects? Primarily to meet its self- imposed lending quotas, which
increase by billions every year. For many Bank employees and
managers, the most important single measure of their success is
ffilfilling the annual lending quota.
ConabWs Flow Cha rts. Thus far, Conable's attempt at Bank
reorganization appears to be primarily a change in flow charts and
the ejection of a few hundred bureaucrats (with generous severance
pay of up to a quarter of a million dollars each). Though hiring
environmentalis t s might make the Bank more aware of the damage it
does, it is unlikely that the Bank will change its approach
fundamentally. The Bank has known for many years of the
environmental damage its programs caused in Brazil, Indonesia, and
sub-Sahara Africa--yet has not abolished funding for the harmful
projects. It is still apparently motivated to set new records on
its lending levels.
Unless the Bank can find a way to direct its megabilliobs
intelligently to the private sector instead of to state-run
enterprises and government bureaucracies, the Bank will continue
doing more harm than good.
Prepared for The Heritage Foundation by James Bovard a
Washington-based consultant
}}