SHARM EL SHEIK, Egypt — David Malpass, the president of the World Bank, arrived at the United Nations local weather summit on a mission to show he and his establishment are totally engaged in efforts to curb world warming and help poor nations battered by more and more extreme droughts, fires and storms.
“We are approaching the climate crisis with action and impact,” he mentioned in an handle to finance ministers from across the globe on Wednesday morning. “We want to dramatically increase the number and size of projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.”
But shortly after that speech, Mr. Malpass was on the defensive.
After making the remarks at the World Bank pavilion contained in the sprawling convention middle that’s internet hosting the summit, often called COP27, Mr. Malpass was confronted by a reporter for The Guardian who repeatedly requested, “Are you a climate denier?”
Mr. Malpass turned heel. “You know I’m not,” he mentioned, earlier than being escorted away by World Bank workers members.
Three years after being nominated to guide the World Bank by President Donald J. Trump, Mr. Malpass is performing a high-wire act.
He is the face of an establishment that gives billions of {dollars} a yr to finance tasks aimed at mitigating the results of local weather change and serving to poor international locations adapt to a hotter planet. Yet he’s dogged by questions on his personal views on the science of local weather change, in addition to accusations that the World Bank just isn’t doing practically sufficient.
“I don’t have any personal beef with him as an individual,” former Vice President Al Gore, who has been an ardent critic of Mr. Malpass and has called him a “climate denier,” mentioned in an interview earlier than the summit.
But, Mr. Gore added, “his approach has really fallen way short of what the world needs.”
Scientists and coverage specialists have been saying for years that the World Bank just isn’t appearing swiftly sufficient to sort out local weather change underneath Mr. Malpass. They level to excessive rates of interest for creating international locations, inadequate local weather funds and continued financing for fossil gas tasks as proof that the financial institution lacks a cohesive local weather technique.
Then, in a stay interview with The New York Times in September, Mr. Malpass declined to say whether or not he accepted the scientific consensus that the burning of oil, fuel and coal was quickly warming the planet.
“I’m not a scientist,” he mentioned at the time, repeating a speaking level usually utilized by local weather change deniers.
Many main voices within the local weather motion known as for his resignation, and a few of the financial institution’s prime shareholders expressed considerations about his management.
“We disagree with the comments made by President Malpass,” Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, mentioned in September. “We expect the World Bank to be a global leader of climate ambition and mobilization.”
Our Coverage of the COP27 Climate Summit
Mr. Malpass held on to his job. But within the weeks that adopted, two unbiased studies raised questions concerning the World Bank’s local weather technique.
Last month, Oxfam issued a report that known as into doubt the financial institution’s claims concerning the extent of its local weather work. After conducting an unbiased audit of what the financial institution mentioned was its $17.2 billion local weather portfolio in 2020, Oxfam mentioned that determine may very well be off by as a lot as $7 billion.
“The public really knows very little about what the bank is counting as climate financing,” Christian Donaldson, a senior coverage adviser at Oxfam, mentioned. “Its reporting is very inadequate.”
Another report from a bunch of advocacy organizations discovered that for the reason that 2015 Paris Agreement, during which world leaders pledged to restrict world warming to 1.5 levels Celsius in contrast with preindustrial ranges, the World Bank has spent $14.8 billion supporting fossil gas tasks. The planet, in the meantime, has warmed a mean of 1.1 levels Celsius.
“Each time the World Bank invests in another fossil fuel project, it fuels more climate disaster,” Sophie Richmond, one of many group’s organizers, mentioned. “There is no justification for using taxpayers’ money to exacerbate the climate crisis.”
Mr. Malpass and different World Bank executives have defended their file, pointing to particular tasks and the dimensions of their funding for local weather efforts as proof of their dedication to the problem.
The World Bank is the most important world supplier of financing for local weather tasks, spending some $68 billion on such efforts over the previous 5 years, in keeping with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Just earlier than arriving in Egypt, Mr. Malpass was in South Africa visiting the Komati Power Station, a former coal-fired energy plant that’s being repurposed to make use of photo voltaic and wind energy with funding from the World Bank. (Mr. Malpass’s flight out of South Africa was hit by lightning, delaying his arrival in Egypt.)
In an interview earlier than the convention, Axel van Trotsenburg, the World Bank’s managing director of operations, instructed that rich nations, together with the financial institution’s prime shareholders, had been treating the financial institution as a scapegoat as a result of they had been shifting too slowly on local weather motion themselves.
“There is an effort to distract the inaction by many of the other actors by focusing on the actions of the bank,” Mr. Trotsenburg mentioned.
Plenty of worldwide leaders are standing by Mr. Malpass and the World Bank.
Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, the director-general of the World Trade Organization, mentioned Mr. Malpass nonetheless had her help.
“I’ve been working with David for quite some time, and we really collaborate,” she mentioned at a New York Times occasion on the sidelines of the U.N. local weather summit on Tuesday. “What we should do is support and encourage the World Bank ahead to finish the job that he’s doing and then help him to mobilize the financing.”
António Guterres, the U.N. secretary common, mentioned the World Bank’s shortcomings went past any particular person.
“The problem is not the president of the bank,” he mentioned in an interview late final month. “The problem is sometimes the board and sometimes the bureaucracy. The board must give a clear orientation for the World Bank, for the other international financial institutions. They need to do more for climate.”
The World Bank is ruled by its main shareholders, which embody the United States, Germany, France and Japan, and it follows the path of these international locations.
“I think the leaders of the I.M.F., the World Bank, the regional development banks are doing what they can,” Ms. Okonjo-Iweala mentioned, referring to the International Monetary Fund. “But there’s a limit. The shareholders have to take the decision to support them. They need more capital, for instance. They need to relax some of their stringent criteria. Do I see that happening? I think momentum is building.”
At COP27, a number of world leaders indicated their help for basic reforms of the World Bank and the I.M.F., which had been shaped practically 80 years in the past towards the top of World War II.
But forms could hamper efforts to enact swift and radical change.
“I’m not overly optimistic that there is an irreversible process of institutional change taking place, but I think there’s heightened awareness of need for that,” mentioned Ashvin Dayal, who leads the facility and local weather program at the Rockefeller Foundation. “These institutions are ultimately the ones that are going to make or break the battles to confront climate change in the developing world, and the clock has never been ticking more than it is now.”
Raymond Zhong contributed reporting from New York, and Max Bearak contributed reporting from Sharm el Sheikh.
