On the other hand, with the World Bank, there are concerns about the types of development projects funded by the IBRD and IDA. Many infrastructural projects, which are financed by the World Bank Group, have social and environmental implications for the populations in the affected areas and criticism has centred around the ethical issues of funding such projects. E.g. World Bank has funded construction of hydroelectric dams in various countries, which had a result in the displacement of indigenous people of the area. There are also concerns that the World Bank is working in partnership with the private sector, which may undermine the role of the state as the primary provider of essential goods and services, such as healthcare and education, resulting in the shortfall of such services in countries badly in need of them.
Critics of the World Bank and the IMF are also apprehensive about the role of the Bretton Woods Institutions in shaping the development discourse through their research, training and publishing activities. As the World Bank and the IMF are regarded as experts in their field of financial regulation and economic development, their views and prescriptions may undermine or eliminate alternative perspectives on development.
And finally there are also some criticism against the World Bank and the IMF governance structures which are dominated by industrialised countries. Decisions are made and policies implemented by leading industrialised countries - which are also known as the G 7 - because they represent the largest donors without much consultation with poor and developing countries.
…
