Those deeply involved in the tech revolution are already mapping out Industry4.0 or the Fourth Industrial Revolution. The Davos World Economic Forum associated Industry1.0 to the steam age, the second to the electrical age, the third to the Digital Revolution and the Fourth to new Internet of Industry. Today, technological breakthroughs in robotics, nano-technology, biotechnology and artificial intelligence create new goods and services, requiring new forms of governance.

In the light of profound changes in technology, climate change and our understanding of inequality and global imbalances, the time has come to take stock and help emerging markets understand what options there are for development in the New Economy.

In short, Development4.0 is not about more money, but how to live happily, peacefully and prosperously in harmony with each other, nature and continually to evolve with technology and each other. Development4.0 is not going to be a one-size-fit-all model, but diverse ways to think about the future of man. Mapping these pathways would be an achievement in itself.

Private banks might be used to keep information confidential to protect their clients. But EBRD loans are public money and banking secrecy rules have to be modified in order to acknowledge the fact that the public has a right to monitor these financial flows.

Already before the last board meeting in October, the EBRD received 27 percent of all GCF finances. With the last large project the share will be even higher. Add to that other international financial institutions and what is left for direct beneficiaries is becoming less and less.

The report also states that it takes approximately 29.8 days for both men and women to start a business in India, compared to 28.5 days last year. India stood at 156th for “starting a business.”

The IFC provided a $450-million loan for the construction of the Tata Mundra plant in India. Following the IFC’s failure to take necessary reasonable steps to prevent harm in the affected community as is required in terms of its own policy (the Policy on Social and Environmental Sustainability and the Performance Standards) the plant project destroyed the local marine environment, fish populations and sources of water used for drinking and irrigation.

When the affected Indian community tried to sue the IFC in the United States, where the head office of IFC is based, the court declared that the IFC had immunity and therefore could not be sued.