New ActionAid report reveals EIB supports climate-harmful industrial agriculture projects in the Global South

A new report published today (Wednesday, June 19th) reveals that the European Investment Bank (EIB) is supporting harmful agriculture practices that are having devastating impacts on climate.

The report from ActionAid International and Counter Balance shows that by the end of 2023, the EIB had €5 billion in outstanding loans to the agriculture and forestry sector, with an estimated €800 million directed towards agribusiness projects outside the EU.

It further shows that from 2020 to 2022, the EU provided €337 million in guarantees for agribusiness loans by the EIB and other European Development Finance Institutions (DFIs). Case studies illustrate that the EIB’s financing supports cash crops and resource-intensive and industrial agricultural practices, and large corporations with obscure financing models and management without proper environmental and human rights impact assessments.

Titled “The European Investment Bank’s development and climate finance – what’s in it for sustainable agriculture?” the report criticises ongoing support for unsustainable agriculture projects in the Global South and exposes stark contradictions with its stated climate commitments and the Paris Agreement.

Karol Balfe, ActionAid Ireland CEO, said:

“Industrial agriculture is the second largest contributor to climate change after fossil fuels and, at the same time, the most at risk from climate impacts. The EIB has boosted its levels of climate lending, but it fails to invest in sustainable agriculture which has limited profitability. The Bank therefore fails to demonstrate the development and climate additionality of its investments which alone can justify the use of public money. The EIB is supporting an unsustainable agriculture model that locks vulnerable communities and countries into food insecurity and debt.”

The report calls on the EIB to:

  • End support to climate harmful and export-oriented agriculture projects.
  • Create a sustainable agri-food system and agroecology task force that can develop a strategy towards financing sustainable agriculture and prioritise lending for sustainable agriculture and agroecology with priority to small-scale farmers and women.
  • Carry out a thorough analysis of the climate and developmental impact of projects financed directly and via financial intermediaries to ensure that impact on local food security and developmental, environmental and human rights impacts are minimised.
  • Refrain from financing agricultural projects through financial intermediaries that lack a strong public development and environmental mandate, but instead invest resources to improve the EIB’s own capacity to select projects with a strong positive local environmental and social impact and which clearly contribute to local food security.
  • Increase its share of adaptation finance in the form of highly concessional finance to avoid exacerbating the debt burden of partner countries. In this context, the EIB should develop its own debt assessment mechanism and include climate resilience debt clauses in its lending operations.

Alexandra Gerasimcikova, head of policy and advocacy at Counter Balance, added:

“The EBI and other DFIs prioritise private investors in the agrifood sector, worsening already prevailing imbalances of power and wealth in the food system at the expense of small farmers, who provide food for up to 70% of the world’s population. Agriculture support in developing countries remains a token gesture in the EIB’s portfolio, echoing a wider trend that sees the economic risks and limited profitability of agriculture projects as a deterrence for their financing.

Frank Vanaerschot, director at Counter Balance, concluded:

“To be a truly progressive force on climate issues, the EIB should cease funding export-oriented agribusiness projects that displace labour, livelihoods, and local knowledge, and must protect small-scale farms by financing a transition from intensive, industrial agricultural methods to sustainable and agroecological systems, which reduces emissions and empowers communities. Only in this way, it will effectively address both its climate footprint and vulnerability.

To learn more about ActionAid Ireland’s work on climate justice, click here.

Protesters holding End Fossil Fuels banner at a climate demonstration, advocating for renewable energy solutions.

Protestors at COP 28 in Dubai. Photo: Konrad Skotnicki.

Climate protest with diverse crowd holding signs about environmental action in a city square.

Belfast Climate Change March, 2019. Photo: Trócaire.

The Profit Driving the Crisis

Despite their overwhelming contribution to global emissions, fossil fuel companies continue to attract significant financial backing—driven by their enduring profitability. This is starkly illustrated by the case of ExxonMobil, the top fossil fuel investment held by asset managers based in Ireland. In 2023, ExxonMobil reported €33.63 billion ($36 billion) in profit. That is almost twice the GDP of Botswana (€18.1 billion) and nearly three times Namibia’s GDP (€11.5 billion).

Ireland plays a hugely disproportionate role in facilitating investments into fossil fuel companies like ExxonMobil. In 2023, the investments made into fossil fuel companies by investment managers based in Ireland generated an estimated 72.5 million tons of CO2e. This is more than the CO2e emissions for the entire country of Ireland—and more than ten times that generated by Sierra Leone.

The Global Human Impact

The climate crisis is here, now, and it is causing disproportionate harm in the Global South. In Bangladesh, rising sea levels and increasingly severe cyclones are displacing coastal communities, with projections indicating that 17% of the entire country could be underwater by 2050. The legally binding Paris Agreement on climate change explicitly acknowledges the importance of tackling private finance. Its three overarching goals are: keeping below 1.5C of warming; increasing adaptation and making finance flows consistent with low emissions and resilience.

This gives a clear mandate for action:  both tax reform and corporate regulation are needed to tackle financial flows, and both nationally in Ireland and at EU level, ‘polluter pays’ taxes are lacking and regulation of the financial sector remains weak and fragmented. While EU regulation exists, it is designed more to nudge investors toward more sustainable investment practices by increasing transparency and reporting levels than to enforce strict standards. And it is moving in the wrong direction: the recently passed EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive excluded investments; and now the EU Commission’s Omnibus legislative proposal threatens to undo the limited gains made on climate plans, as well as blocking future attempts for stronger action at national level.

The Risk of Inaction

Fossil fuel investment is too profitable to remain weakly regulated. If Ireland continues with its current strategy of encouraging FDI at all costs, and relying on weak EU regulation, we are headed for catastrophe. The Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change has repeatedly warned that every fraction of a degree beyond 1.5°C brings irreversible consequences: collapsed ice sheets, vanishing coral reefs, and extreme weather events that will make vast regions of the planet uninhabitable. And yet, companies are developing oil and gas fields that could push global warming beyond 2°C.

Our research found that 91% of the investments made into fossil fuel companies by investment managers based in Ireland were to companies that have plans for fossil fuel expansion like these. Ireland cannot afford inaction on this issue.

About This Research

The figures in this report regarding investment from Ireland are based on new research commissioned by ActionAid Ireland and Trócaire. In the paper, we uncover the scale of fossil fuel investment through Ireland, who the investors are, and in which fossil fuel companies they are investing.  We analyse the current regulatory framework and explain why it is inadequate—and moving in the wrong direction. And we make specific recommendations for change, which are summarised below.

Summary of Recommendations

Regulate the private financial sector
Ireland must end its outsized role as an enabler of destructive fossil fuel investment. Ireland should introduce a strong gender-responsive national human rights and environmental due diligence framework which includes the regulation of investors with respect to human rights and the environment and climate. The transposition of the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive could achieve this if downstream activities are included and the Omnibus proposal is rejected. Ireland should prohibit investments in fossil fuel expansion and require investors to implement climate transition plans consistent with a 1.5°C climate limit.

Endorse the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty
Ireland should endorse developing a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty to curb fossil fuel expansion and commit to a fair and funded phase out of fossil fuels.

Support tax justice
Ireland should support bold and fair new global tax rules through the UN Framework Convention on Tax, should adopt all OECD BEPS measures, and should conduct an updated and comprehensive spillover analysis of its tax policy. Ireland should take coordinated action globally, at the EU level and domestically to introduce a range of new taxes to mobilise finance needed for climate justice, based on ‘polluter pays’ and social equity principles such as wealth taxes for the highest earners, climate damages tax on investors, fossil fuel production taxes and levies on aviation and shipping.

Finance a just transition
Ireland must also meet its fair share climate finance obligations under Article 9.1 of the Paris Agreement, and pay our ecological debt to the Global South. Ireland should support conditionality-free debt cancellation for countries on the front lines of the climate crisis, commit to a new UN Framework Convention on Sovereign Debt, moving debt negotiations from the IMF to the UN, and to a debt workout mechanism that is fully representative and fair.

Further reading