Now, picture these towers forcibly built with little regard for the free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) of the very communities who have been the stewards and guardians of these lands. In a twist, these towers are ultimately abandoned without connecting electric cables due to local opposition, leaving the land beneath them almost useless for the communities.

This scenario is not hypothetical; it unfolded in Khokana, a small farming community of the indigenous Newar people in Nepal's Kathmandu Valley. The Thankot-Chapagaon-Bhaktapur 132 kV transmission line project, initiated in 2000 with support from the Asian Development Bank (ADB), stands as a stark example of how multilateral development bank projects can go awry.

As the Asia Pacific region navigates complex geopolitical dynamics and strives to drastically reduce its carbon footprint to achieve a net-zero economy by 2050, ADB plays a crucial role. The 58th annual meeting of its board of governors in Milan, Italy, in early May was aimed at showcasing ADB's new commitments to support its developing member nations in this formidable transformation.

Masato Kanda, who took the helm of ADB in February, emphasized the importance of core values in the bank's ongoing internal changes. “Throughout this transformation, ADB remains anchored in values that I personally hold close: humility, contribution and trust,” he said.

These values are indeed paramount, especially as ADB plans to increase its lending capacity by up to US$100 billion over the next decade. A specific commitment includes ensuring that climate finance support reaches 50 percent of its total annual committed financing volume by 2030. Furthermore, the bank aims to strategically expand its collaboration with the private sector.

A critical question arises: Are humility, contribution and trust central to ADB’s engagement with civil society, particularly with indigenous peoples of Asia Pacific, who should be regarded as partners?

The bank has a significant opportunity to ensure indigenous peoples are treated with due respect as rights holders and development partners, ensuring their full consultation and engagement when projects are supported on their lands.

In fairness, ADB has been making efforts to enhance its accountability. In 2024, it approved its new civil society approach, which aims for stronger engagement with non-state actors, including those advocating for indigenous peoples in Asia-Pacific.

Unfortunately, at the Milan meeting, ADB struggled to uphold these new commitments. Civil society was relegated to an isolated space in the convention center's basement, a "seclusion by design" that has been a long-standing practice of ADB toward civil society delegations.

Recently, ADB also released its new environmental and social framework (ESF), formally known as its safeguards policies. These will be enforced from early 2026, replacing the existing 2009 Safeguard Policy Statement. If genuinely implemented, these essential safeguards could drastically enhance the quality of ADB-financed work by better protecting the rights of communities affected by its projects, fostering inclusive and bottom-up endeavors based on accountability.

The new framework offers greater recognition of indigenous peoples' rights, with the Environmental and Social Standard Seven (ESS7) specifically centered on them. It is also promising that the new framework aligns more closely with climate action, even if the bank's approach to the just energy transition needs to go further in divesting from gas and ensuring indigenous peoples are central to this massive transition.

Despite these improvements "on paper", considerable concerns remain. The ESS7 still does not fully and unconditionally embrace and uphold the rights of indigenous peoples to FPIC for projects affecting them. Furthermore, the ESS7 and the overall framework are not yet fully aligned with international human rights standards. This grave weakness must be amended. There should be no preconditions or limitations on indigenous peoples' rights to express not just their opinion, but their inalienable right to provide or withhold consent for any project affecting them. Unfortunately, an approach based on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) has yet to materialize.

The implementation of the new civil society approach and framework will be critical. A major shift in ADB's organizational culture will be required to enforce these new policies genuinely, rather than tokenistically. Real, principled leadership will be essential.

A crucial test of Kanda's commitment to indigenous peoples and civil society will be the ongoing review of ADB's accountability mechanism (AM). This complex system allows those with alleged grievances and rights violations from ADB-supported projects to seek redress.

In recent months, activists working to enhance ADB's accountability have observed a less than promising attitude from bank officials regarding drastic improvements to the current 2012 policy. Since its inception, the AM's provisions have often proved inadequate in providing redress for indigenous communities and others affected by ADB projects.

The new AM policy should incorporate best practices from other international multilateral finance institutions and even go beyond. Procedures for aggrieved citizens to access the AM mechanisms should be simplified, made considerably more accessible and holistically expanded.

Currently, the AM has one of the lowest rates of complaint eligibility among independent accountability mechanisms of development banks, meaning attempts at mediation or review for noncompliance are likely to be rejected. People approaching the AM should not be compelled to first approach local ADB offices, as experience has shown this to be ineffective.

Among many other improvements, the revised AM policy should guarantee much stronger remedial outcomes. The current policy does not even guarantee that further harms might be prevented when credible complaints are received, as the AM lacks authority to recommend even temporary suspension of projects when safeguards noncompliance is found.

Kanda said his first field visit as president was to Cambodia, a country with significant ADB investments. There, he listened to fishing families, who are embracing sustainable practices to revitalize marine ecosystems while strengthening their livelihoods.

It would have been appropriate for Kanda to also acknowledge ADB's past failures there. The ADB-supported Cambodia Railway Rehabilitation Project, started in 2006, led to massive forced evictions and other human rights violations, incidents for which ADB eventually took responsibility.

ADB has a monumental role in ensuring the sustainable development of the entire Asia-Pacific region. Will its new policies and practices genuinely embrace the rights of indigenous peoples and other affected communities? Most importantly, will Kanda and his team demonstrate real, principled leadership, especially as the bank embarks on significantly scaling up its work with the private sector?

***

Prabindra Shakya is the convener of the Asia Indigenous Peoples Network on Extractive Industries and Energy (AIPNEE) and founder/director of the Community Empowerment and Social Justice Network (CEMSOJ). Simone Galimberti is a freelance writer focused on development, human rights, democracy and regional integration in the Asia Pacific.