Centering communities in the debate on large-scale dams and development finance
By Genny Ngende, Africa Program Senior Campaign Coordinator
As part of our multi-layered advocacy strategy to expose the environmental and human rights impacts of large-scale hydropower projects, International Rivers recently engaged with international financial institutions at two major global forums: the Finance in Common Summit (FiCS) in Cape Town (February 2025) and the World Bank Spring Meetings in Washington, D.C. (April 2025). With the support of partner organizations—including Initiative pour le Développement Local (IDEL), Coalition des Organisations de la Société Civile pour le Suivi des Réformes et de l’Action Publique (CORAP), Centre du Commerce International pour le Développement (CECIDE), and the Kaoko-Epupa Development Foundation at FiCS, and CORAP again at the World Bank—we shared critical perspectives often left out of the conversation, urging greater accountability and reform in global energy financing.
FiCS 2025: Growth for Whom?
Despite its theme, “Fostering Infrastructure and Finance for Just and Sustainable Growth,” FiCS 2025 overwhelmingly prioritized financial and institutional interests. Environmental and social issues were relegated to a few sessions. Key discussions took place behind closed doors, with civil society organizations (CSOs) largely shut out, underscoring a systemic pattern where development is designed without those who must live with its consequences.
While framed as a contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals — focused on ensuring communities have access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy—the summit ultimately revealed who truly benefits: banks and project developers, and not communities. The discussions largely ignored the unaffordability, unreliability, and unsustainability often associated with large-scale hydropower projects. This stark imbalance raises urgent questions about the costs of “development” and the price paid in lost livelihoods, displacement, and ecological degradation.
Civil Society’s Counter-Narrative: “Just Transition in Whose Interest?”
In response, International Rivers and the Coalition for Human Rights in Development hosted a civil society side event, “Just Transition in Whose Interest?” at the Summit. Speakers from Africa, Asia, and Latin America—including representatives from Save our Sacred Lands (South Africa), Right Energy Partnership with Indigenous Peoples, Aksi! for gender, social and ecological justice (Indonesia), Instituto Maira (Brazil), and two DRC-based organisations: CORAP and IDEL — voiced shared concerns: communities are denied Free, Prior, and Informed Consent, lack access to crucial information, and are excluded from mechanisms that could hold power to account.
This convening went beyond symbolism; it formed part of a broader transnational mobilization. Drafts of a declaration were circulated before and during FiCS, as civil society organizations coordinated across borders to spotlight systemic failures in the prevailing development paradigm. The process culminated in a final declaration that articulates the urgency of transitioning toward truly sustainable energy solutions, explicitly rejecting mega-dam projects as false solutions. The declaration, signed by over 200 civil society organizations from around the world, underscored the imperative for inclusive, rights-based development frameworks that center communities rather than the profit motives of corporations and financial institutions.
World Bank Spring Meetings: Returning to Mega Dams
As part of our continued efforts to confront the harmful legacy and current threats of large-scale hydropower dams, International Rivers, together with CORAP, participated in the World Bank and IMF Spring Meetings in Washington, D.C. The World Bank Group‘s return to megadams marks a major reversal that obscures past failures and the ongoing challenges for dam-affected communities seeking redress.
During a biannual meeting between civil society groups and European World Bank executive directors, we highlighted the global risks of mega dam financing, focusing especially on the controversial Grand Inga Project in the DRC that will displace tens of thousands of people. Additionally, a vast stretch of fertile land is at risk of becoming submerged, wiping out farmland, devastating local livelihoods, and imposing ecological damage.
This engagement set the stage for a dedicated side event hosted by International Rivers, featuring representatives of CEE Bankwatch Network, Save the River Swat Movement, CORAP, and the World Bank Group. The CSO representatives addressed the human and ecological fallout from the Madyan Hydropower Project (Pakistan), Rogun River dam (Tajikistan), and impending risks from the proposed Inga Dam (DRC). Collectively, these testimonies revealed that current environmental and social standards fall short in addressing the scale of human rights violations and ecological harm associated with large-scale infrastructure projects. World Bank representatives reaffirmed their commitment to “Mission 300” — the bold initiative to bring electricity to 300 million people across Africa. It’s a goal that speaks to the urgent need to address energy poverty across the continent. At the same time, they acknowledged the harms linked to large-scale infrastructure projects, pointing to the Bank’s safeguards, which they say often go beyond national standards. Still, they were frank: “There are tradeoffs in large infrastructure projects.” It was a reminder of the complex balancing act between development goals and the need to safeguard people and ecosystems.
Conclusion: Alternative Energy Sources
Time and again, communities are generally excluded from the development discourse. This raises an important question: Is the exclusion of communities from the processes of hydropower projects intentional, because their full participation would expose that mega dam projects repeatedly fail to deliver truly sustainable development? Around the world, the story is all too familiar: Mega dam projects promise progress, but leave devastation in their wake. Despite claims of clean energy and development, these massive infrastructures have consistently caused environmental destruction, displaced vulnerable communities, and violated basic human rights. Additionally, they rarely deliver the local benefits they promise. Roads, schools, clinics — many of these commitments to resettled populations often do not materialize. Instead of fostering sustainable growth, mega-dams too often become symbols of broken promises and top-down decision-making.
Civil society groups, backed by testimonies shared at FiCS and the World Bank Spring Meeting, are urging the World Bank Group to shift away from large-scale hydropower projects. These projects, they argue, have consistently resulted in serious ecological damage and human rights abuses, failing to deliver equitable development outcomes.
Consequently, we collectively propose that the World Bank Group halt support for new large-scale dams, conduct and disclose audits of indirect financing via intermediaries, address existing grievances at dam sites, and undertake a full review of the long-term social and environmental harms caused by past projects. The message is clear: current models of large-scale resource-intensive energy projects are failing to meet the needs of communities, so the time to rethink and redirect is now.