In fact, it is the largest multilateral source of loan and equity
financing for private sector projects in the developing world. IFC
generally operates independently of the rest of the World Bank,
as it is legally and financially autonomous with its own Articles
of Agreement, share capital, management and staff. Each member country
is represented in IFC board and voting power is strictly connected with
the shares that each country has. Therefore the G8 and
few other industrialised countries control the majority of IFC board.
The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) was
established in 1991, to finance new private sector development in
the recently ex-Soviet countries. It now works in 27 countries from
central Europe to central Asia, and is the largest single investor
in the region. It is owned by 60 countries and two intergovernmental
institutions. Like the IFC, it invests mainly in private enterprises,
usually together with commercial partners. It provides project financing
for banks, industries and businesses, both new ventures and investments
in existing companies. EBRD has a similar financial structure to
the IFC board and voting system.
Export Credit Agencies
Export credit agencies can be either public or private bodies.
The public agencies are run by national governments and use public
money to provide exporters and their banks with insurance and guarantees
against different types of risk, such as political risk, currency
risk or breach of contract by a foreign government or contractor.
Some ECAs also provide debt and equity. The official ECAs generally
cover risks that the private sector is unwilling to bear.
Broadly, export credit guarantees work as follows. Where a company
deems there is a risk of not being paid for the goods it supplies
to an importer abroad, it contacts its national ECA and takes out
an insurance policy, for which it pays a premium. The ECA then undertakes
to pay the exporter for the exported goods should the importer default
on payment.
The ECA in turn almost always insists on the government of the
importing country giving a counter-guarantee whereby it takes over
the debt from the ECA. In the event of a default, the ECA’s loss
therefore gets added to the stock of bilateral debt owed to the
ECA’s home government. Ultimately, therefore, it is the poor of
the South who end up paying the bulk of the bill for failed ECA-backed
development projects. Because ECA debt is charged at commercial
rates, it is particularly onerous for poorer countries. ECAs are
the source of 24% of developing country debt and 56% of debt owed
to official agencies. In the case of the UK, 95% of the debt owed
by developing countries to the UK government is in the form of export
credit debt.
Export credit agencies are the largest source of public finance
for private sector projects in the world. In 2000, export credit
agencies supported $500 billion in guarantees and insurance to developing
countries and $58.8 in export credits. By contrast, the combined
total of all the loans made by Multilateral Development Banks, such
as the World Bank, was $41 billion.
IFIs and fossil fuels
All of the IFIs devote significant shares of their annual loans,
investments and guarantees to fossil fuel projects. It is estimated
that in the period 1995-1999, IFIs allocated around US$55 billion
to projects in these sectors (not including fossil fuel thermal
generating plants). However, the quality of publicly accessible
data is such that it is difficult to make a precise estimate. It
should be noted here that public IFIs leverage other sources of
capital, which adds significantly to the total amount of investments
in these sectors.
Between 1994 and early 1999, oil and gas development projects and
power projects using fossil fuels made up nearly 40% of project
and trade finance flows to developing countries; ECAs accounted
for 20% of this financing. Friends of the Earth International and
other civil society groups are calling for all International Financial
Institutions (IFIs) and Export Credit Agencies (ECAs), to phase-out
their financing of fossil fuel and mining projects within a period
of five years. Current IFI lending practices in these sectors do
not contribute to the eradication of poverty and the creation of
sustainable societies, as they disregard the finite nature of natural
resources and exacerbate rather than ameliorate inequities. This
phase-out should cover all phases of the fossil fuel and mining
cycles: prospecting, exploration, test drilling, exploitation, as
well as construction of related infrastructure such as pipelines
and roads, and any financial and regulatory advice or programs by
IFIs that favour such projects.
Links:
Multilateral development banks: