Closed Doors, Open Funds: The Accountability Crisis in Central Asia’s Development Projects
by Shoira
Development finance institutions are increasingly turning their attention to Central Asia, attracted by political and economic reforms that are opening up markets, which was formerly isolated from global investment. Recent transitions in leadership and policy shifts across the region have created new opportunities for private sector engagement, infrastructure development, and sustainable growth.
Based on the data from Early Warning System, compiled in our South Caucasus and Central Asia Tracker, from January 1, 2020 to March 31, 2025 a total of 2160 projects with investment of 251.6 billion were proposed in the South Caucasus and Central Asia mainly by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), Asian Development Bank (ADB), Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), World Bank and International Finance Corporation (IFC), European Investment Bank (EIB), Green Climate Fund (GCF).
According to data compiled by the Early Warning System, between January 1, 2020, and March 31, 2025, Uzbekistan has emerged as the primary recipient of development finance investment within the Central Asian countries. Over this period, the country accounted for 329 projects, with a total investment volume estimated at approximately US$23.7 billion. Notably, Uzbekistan has attracted a higher concentration of energy-related projects relative to its regional peers. However, these projects also exhibit a greater level of risk, particularly in the energy sector, distinguishing Uzbekistan from other countries in the region.
Speaking about financed sectors and the category of risks of the invested projects, as we can see from Table 1, Uzbekistan has more risky projects connected with energy projects in the region. The entire Aktau-Tamdy state reserve with bird Area and key Biodiversity Area has been moved to another area because of the Zarafshon wind power project (500 MW), EBRD–promoted by Masdar company (Abu Dhabi) in May 2023.
Additionally, many multi-country projects funded by the ADB, EBRD, AIIB, and IFC are focused on sectors such as energy, transport, and industry and trade, and are implemented in Central Asia, European countries, and parts of South Asia.
Most Technical Assistance projects across various sectors are primarily implemented in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. Meanwhile, investments aimed at government-related reforms and development are largely directed toward Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. It is worth noting that projects related to technical assistance and reforms are financed through grant investments.
Central Asia’s Shrinking Civic Space: When Development Harms Accountability
Despite the promising rhetoric of openness and international investment, the reality for civil society in Central Asia paints a very different picture. Across the region, community and civil society continue to be sidelined from decision-making processes that directly impact their lives. Instead of fostering transparency, participation, and accountability, the environment for civil society remains largely restrictive, making it difficult, if not dangerous, for citizens to question projects financed by Development Finance Institutions.
In Central Asia, civil society operates under constant threat: restrictive laws, bureaucratic hurdles, limited access to funding, and fear of repression define their daily reality. Building strong civil society networks has become essential, not only to amplify voices for human rights and environmental justice but also to resist increasing government pressure. While some countries in the region have introduced reform narratives, such as Uzbekistan’s 2021–2025 “Concept on Development of Civil Society,” these initiatives fall short. Major issues like restrictive Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) registration procedures, burdensome reporting obligations, and limitations on free speech remain unaddressed.
Similarly, Tajikistan has intensified repression, with over 700 NGOs dissolved between May 2022 and August 2023, and human rights defenders, including journalists, facing severe intimidation. Kazakhstan restricts peaceful assembly and monitors NGOs receiving foreign funding, while Kyrgyzstan has enacted a “foreign agent” law to further limit NGO activities. Turkmenistan, one of the world’s most authoritarian regimes, remains extremely repressive, ranking near the bottom of the World Press Freedom Index. These countries exhibit ongoing efforts to stifle civil society and dissent.
The Development Finance Institutions Accountability Gap
One of the starkest illustrations of this repression is the limited number of complaints filed by Central Asian communities to Development Finance Institutions accountability mechanisms. Despite millions of dollars pouring into the region from institutions like the World Bank, ADB, EBRD, and IFC, the actual number of registered grievances remains shockingly low. Referring to the ADB complaint register archive from 2012 to 2023, only 15 complaints have been registered from Central Asian countries, mainly from Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. The panel cases of the Independent Project Accountability Mechanism of EBRD also show only 5 projects submitted in 2020 to 2024. From their case registry, we learn that recent complaints were connected with the Zarafshon Wind project in Uzbekistan (2024) submitted by Bankwatch and the Indorama Agro Capex Loan (2023) by the Uzbek Forum for Human Rights. Similar to ADB and EBRD, from 2010 to 2024, the World Bank’s Inspection Panel has only recorded 8 cases originating from Central Asian countries, primarily linked to projects under the Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation (CAREC) initiative in Kazakhstan and support for the construction of the Rogun Dam in Tajikistan.
Communities and civil society often lack the knowledge and capacity to navigate the application process, conduct thorough research, and submit complaints effectively. Moreover, the lengthy review process for cases acts as a significant deterrent, as communities face uncertainty regarding their safety and security during and after the submission of complaints. In most cases, governments and state-connected companies control project implementation, leaving little space for independent oversight or public participation. Therefore, Development Finance Institutions and other relevant organizations need to prioritize improving access to information and strengthening outreach efforts. Additionally, the prolonged nature of the complaint process poses significant risks, as activists or civil society involved in submitting complaints may face persecution, including imprisonment, before the process concludes. Below, I included some cases that may give a glimpse of what is happening now in Central Asia.
Case 1: Bishkek’s Greenest Ride — Under Threat
In Kyrgyzstan’s capital, Bishkek, the city’s iconic trolleybus — the most environmentally friendly form of public transport — is disappearing. The reason? A $50 million project funded by ADB aiming at introducing new electric buses under the “Urban Transport Electrification Project.” However, for the grassroots movement Bishkeksmog, the project represents more than just modernization — it symbolizes the reckless dismantling of a sustainable transport system without proper public consultation or transparency. Investigations by Bishkeksmog revealed inconsistencies and possible violations of international loan agreements between the city, the EBRD, and the ADB. Despite these concerns, the local government prohibited peaceful protests, arrested activists (including the head of Bishkeksmog), and ignored labor rights violations affecting over 600 trolleybus employees. Legal action by Bishkeksmog is ongoing, but negotiations with the banks have proven difficult, with responsibility for the violations being pushed between banks and local authorities.
Case 2: Silencing Critics in Kazakhstan
In Kazakhstan, Development Finance Institutions’ investments in the oil and energy sector have become entangled with allegations of corruption and suppression of free speech. A report by a Kazakh CSO partner, “Civil Society Participation in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI),” details a concerning case. Journalist Daniira Adilbekova was sentenced to four years and six months in a high-security prison on October 18, 2024, for allegedly publishing false information about corruption within Kazakhstan’s energy sector, specifically targeting Vice Minister of Energy Erlan Akkenzhenov. Her trial was widely condemned for its lack of transparency, highlighting the risks faced by those who challenge government narratives, especially when those narratives involve Development Finance Institution-backed projects.
Case 3: Monitoring Under Threat in Uzbekistan
Uzbekistan’s cotton industry has long been under international scrutiny, especially concerning labor rights. Between 2015 and 2023, Indorama Agro secured financial support totaling approximately $261 million from several international development institutions — including $75 million from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), $171 million from the International Finance Corporation (IFC), and $15 million from the Asian Development Bank (ADB) — to advance the cotton sector in Uzbekistan. Yet, activists monitoring these projects, such as the Uzbek Forum for Human Rights (UFHR), face intimidation and threats. In early 2024, a government security officer warned an independent rights monitor involved in the project that their activities were “dangerous” and could lead to criminal charges. Such threats demonstrate the enormous risks faced by those trying to hold powerful actors accountable, particularly when international finance is involved.
Moving Forward: Reimagining Accountability in Central Asia
Central Asia’s experience highlights a troubling disconnect between the promises of international development and the lived experiences of local communities. For Development Finance Institutions, investing in the region without ensuring robust transparency, community engagement, and safe grievance mechanisms is not just negligent — it’s complicit in the silencing of civil society.
Moving forward, Development Finance Institutions and international partners must:
- Strengthen outreach and access to project information
- Simplify and secure grievance mechanisms
- Protect community activists and independent monitors
- Demand meaningful community participation before project approval
- Ensure independent monitoring throughout project cycles.
In a region where raising your voice can mean risking your freedom, the international community must not turn a blind eye. Investment without accountability is not development — it’s exploitation. The story of Central Asian CSOs is not simply one of survival against the odds. It is a story of creativity, adaptation, and a profound belief in the possibility of change — even when that change comes slowly, quietly, and in everyday acts of courage. Supporting civil society in Central Asia, therefore, requires more than technical assistance or project-based funding. It calls for recognising and protecting the diverse forms of civic action that exist beyond official structures. It demands flexibility from international donors, respect for local agency, and a long-term commitment to defending the civic space against authoritarian encroachment.
