World Bank Voices
Syndicate content


EITI agenda advances despite divergent views

Charles Feinstein's picture
Photo by EITI

Tensions were high at the international Board meeting of Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) in Berne, Switzerland.  EITI Board members, 20 in all, including civil society representatives, investors, managers of multinational corporations, and implementing and supporting country officials, debated stridently for two days on issues like how EITI implementing countries are judged on whether they have met the requirements of the “Standard” set by the EITI. As my first EITI Board meeting, I was surprised to find such divergent views on operational issues when we clearly all agree on the end goal: increasing transparency in the extractive industries to decrease the space for corruption and enhance the development impact of revenues from the sector. 

In 2013, EITI raised the bar of transparency with the introduction of a new Standard that requires more detailed reporting on extractive company and state owned enterprise payments, government receipts and a broader range of contextual information on the sector in EITI implementing countries. The first batch of reports produced under the Standard arrived between late 2014 and early 2015. Many EITI countries have so far struggled to meet the enhanced requirements of the Standard and concerns have been raised about how they will be assessed when they undergo the validation process (the quality assurance process that leads to the judgement of compliance with the EITI Standard). 

The Longer World Waits to Address Climate Change, the Higher the Cost

Rachel Kyte's picture
Also available in: العربية | Français | Español | 中文

Climate change ministerial, IMF/World Bank Spring Meetings 2014In September, the world’s top scientists said the human influence on climate was clear. Last month, they warned of increased risks of a rapidly warming planet to our economies, environment, food supply, and global security. Today, the latest report from the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) describes what we need to do about it.

The report, focused on mitigation, says that global greenhouse gas emissions were rising faster in the last decade than in the previously three, despite reduction efforts.  Without additional mitigation efforts, we could see a temperature rise of 3.7 to 4.8 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial times by the end of this century. The IPCC says we can still limit that increase to 2 degrees, but that will require substantial technological, economic, institutional, and behavioral change.

Let’s translate the numbers. For every degree rise, that equates to more risk, especially for the poor and most vulnerable.

The High-Risk, Low-Risk Scenarios for Russia’s Economic Future

Birgit Hansl's picture
Also available in: Русский

I discussed our most recent Russia growth outlook at a roundtable at the Higher School of Economics Conference on Apr. 2 with a number of Russian and international experts. This conference is one of the most important and prestigious economic conferences in Russia, and traditionally, the World Bank co-sponsors it as part of its outreach to other stakeholders.


The room was packed...

Why Stories Matter

Ravi Kumar's picture
Children in the classroom. Kenya.

When Jane Otai said there are flying toilets in slums of Nairobi, most of her audience, like me, was trying to figure out what she meant.

A few others laughed softly. Because there are no toilets, she said, “people just do it [in bags] and throw it on the rooftops.” And it is really difficult for women and girls, she added.

Are Super Farms the Solution to the World’s Food Insecurity Challenge? Ten Questions You Need to Ask Yourself

José Cuesta's picture
Also available in: Français | Español | العربية

Join me in a Twitter Chat on why global food prices remain high on Dec. 4 at 10 a.m. ET/15:00 GMT. I'll be tweeting from @worldbanklive with hashtag #foodpriceschat. Ask questions beforehand with hashtag #foodpriceschat. Looking forward to seeing you on Twitter.

Agriculture workers on a strawberry farm in Argentina. © Nahuel Berger/World Bank

Today there are 842 million who are hungry. As the global population approaches 9 billion by 2050, demand for food will keep increasing, requiring sustained improvement in agricultural productivity. Where will these productivity increases come from? For decades, small-scale family farming was widely thought to be more productive and more efficient in reducing poverty than large-scale farming. But now advocates of large-scale agriculture point to its advantages in leveraging huge investments and innovative technologies as well as its enormous export potential. Critics, however, highlight serious environmental, animal welfare, social and economic concerns, especially in the context of fragile institutions. The often outrageous conditions and devastating social impacts that “land grabs” bring about are well known, particularly in severely food-insecure countries.

So, is large-scale farming—particularly the popularly known “super farms”—the solution to food demand challenges? Or is it an obstacle? Here are the 10 key questions you need to ask yourself to better understand this issue. I have tried to address them in the latest issue of Food Price Watch.