The Multilateral Development Banks. Vol. 2: The Asian Development Bank

Author(s):  
Lichtenstein Natalie

Chapter 5, Membership, lays out the framework that was agreed for AIIB membership. AIIB membership is open to any member of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) or Asian Development Bank (AsDB). All of the Prospective Founding Members that signed the AIIB Charter can become members (almost all have already joined). New members are approved by AIIB’s Board of Governors; more than twenty new members were approved in 2017. This Chapter describes the benefits for Founding Members, and the differences for regional and non-regional members. AIIB’s regional members are located in Asia, under a United Nations definition. Regional members are expected to represent 75% of AIIB’s shareholding, and the President must be a national of a regional member. AIIB also has provisions for withdrawal and suspension of membership, very close to the provisions for other multilateral development banks. Tables compare IBRD, AsDB and AIIB membership (regional and non-regional, and new AIIB approvals).


2019 ◽  
pp. 151-157
Author(s):  
S. S. Matveevskii

The existence of a system for assessing the activities of development banks is a necessary condition for a significant contribution of banks to economic development. The article deals with the experience of evaluating the effectiveness of projects and activities of development banks on the examples of the German development Bank, the Asian development Bank and the African development Bank. It has been revealed, that development banks for the evaluation of projects, their activities apply financial and socio-economic indicators, which are used to improve the work of development banks. The basic requirements for the evaluation of projects and activities of development banks have been formulated. The practical experience of the German development Bank, the Asian development Bank and the African development Bank can be used by Vnesheconombank, which is confirmed by scientific studies of Russian authors.


1981 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 303-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen D. Krasner

This paper examines the experience of developing countries in the three major regional financial institutions, the Inter-American, Asian, and African Development Banks. In the Inter-American Development Bank, members from developing countries have secured both influence and resources; in the Asian Development Bank they have secured resources but little influence; in the African Development Bank they have influence but limited resources. This variation can be explained by the different issue area power structures within which the banks function. The Inter-American Development Bank has functioned within a hegemonic structure. The dominant power, the United States, pursued long-term political objectives and accepted considerable autonomy for developing countries within the Bank. The Asian Development Bank has functioned within a bipolar structure with Japan playing an increasingly important role. As a normal power, Japan has pursued tangible economic interests and has constrained the behavior of the Asian Development Bank. Until the late 1970s the African Development Bank functioned in a multipolar structure that largely excluded nonregional countries. This exclusion made it impossible to generate substantial resources. Experience in the regional development banks suggests that a hegemonic structure can offer weaker states both resources and influence provided that the milieu goals of the dominant power are not violated.


2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suresh Nanwani

AbstractThis article offers an examination of the development and operation of accountability mechanisms in multilateral development banks. These mechanisms are gateways for citizens, as non-state actors, to file their grievances in projects that adversely affect them against these international organisations at the international level. The study focuses on the accountability mechanisms established at the World Bank (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and International Development Association) and the Asian Development Bank, and other initiatives and avenues provided by these institutions addressing accountability issues. The article offers an analysis of barriers encountered by claimants in accessing these mechanisms based on insights generated by way of claims filed and participation in accountability procedures. It suggests ways in which civil society's demands for accountability in multilateral development banks and other financial institutions can move forward.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document