BANGLADESH stands at a historic crossroads. As the nation experiences rising energy demands driven by urbanisation, industrialisation and demographic growth, its energy planning decisions will shape the trajectory of development, environmental sustainability and climate resilience for generations to come. Against this backdrop, the government unveiled the Integrated Energy and Power Master Plan, IEPMP, 2023, a long-term strategic framework designed with support from the Japan International Cooperation Agency. While the plan was conceived with the intent of creating an efficient, affordable and sustainable energy future, it has been met with significant criticism. From civil society organisations to academics and energy experts, the consensus is clear: the IEPMP 2023 falls far short of the vision Bangladesh needs for a just, inclusive and climate-aligned energy transition.
听
A fossil-fuel future disguised as sustainable development
ONE of the most glaring criticisms of the IEPMP 2023 is its heavy reliance on fossil fuels, particularly imported liquefied natural gas and coal. At a time when nations around the globe are racing to decarbonise their energy systems, Bangladesh鈥檚 plan appears to move in the opposite direction. The projected energy mix continues to prioritise fossil fuels well into 2041, locking the country into decades of greenhouse gas emissions, foreign currency risks and geopolitical vulnerabilities. The war in Ukraine and subsequent global energy crisis laid bare the perils of import dependency. Yet, the IEPMP chooses to double down on LNG imports rather than embrace a home-grown, renewable-powered future.
This approach not only undermines Bangladesh鈥檚 international commitments under the Paris Agreement but also contradicts its own Mujib Climate Prosperity Plan, which aims to foster a clean, resilient and inclusive energy transition. The irony is stark: on one hand, Bangladesh positions itself globally as a climate-vulnerable country championing climate justice, while, on the other, it continues to expand its fossil fuel infrastructure at home.
听
Weak ambition on renewables
BANGLADESH has enormous potential for renewable energy, especially solar and wind. Yet, the IEPMP鈥檚 target of achieving just 40 per cent renewable energy by 2041 is widely seen as uninspiring. This figure falls short of both regional trends and Bangladesh鈥檚 own capacity. Countries with similar or fewer resources are making bolder moves: Vietnam, for example, has rapidly scaled up solar capacity in just a few years.
More worryingly, the plan lacks clear deployment pathways, interim targets or fiscal and policy incentives for accelerating renewable energy. There is no comprehensive strategy to scale up rooftop solar, solar irrigation, floating solar, offshore wind or community-based mini-grids. Instead of setting out a bold vision, the IEPMP treats renewables as a supplementary source of energy rather than the foundation of a sustainable energy future.
听
Ignoring decentralised energy and energy access
BANGLADESH has made remarkable progress in rural electrification through solar home systems and decentralised solutions. Yet, these achievements are conspicuously downplayed in the IEPMP 2023. The plan overwhelmingly focuses on centralised, grid-based systems and large-scale energy infrastructure, ignoring the transformative potential of decentralised renewable energy.
This is a missed opportunity. Decentralised energy solutions not only ensure last-mile access but also build resilience against natural disasters and grid disruptions. In a country frequently battered by cyclones, floods and rising seas, investing in modular, flexible and community-driven energy models is not just smart 鈥� it is imperative.
听
Flawed process: lack of transparency and participation
ANOTHER core criticism of the IEPMP lies in its development process. The drafting of the plan lacked adequate public consultation and transparency. Key stakeholders, including civil society organisations, academia, local governments and affected communities, were either sidelined or engaged perfunctorily in late-stage discussions. As a result, the plan reflects a technocratic, top-down approach that fails to incorporate the lived realities, aspirations and insights of the people it is meant to serve.
By contrast, a truly inclusive energy master plan would have engaged diverse voices 鈥� including youth, women, indigenous groups, small businesses and local governments 鈥� throughout the process. This would not only ensure democratic legitimacy but also result in more grounded, effective and socially just energy solutions.
Perhaps the most glaring contradiction lies in the plan鈥檚 misalignment with the Mujib Climate Prosperity Plan, Bangladesh鈥檚 flagship vision for a climate-resilient future. The MCPP calls for a shift from climate vulnerability to climate prosperity, anchored in green energy, low-carbon infrastructure and economic resilience. Yet, the IEPMP鈥檚 prioritisation of LNG and coal undermines the very foundation of the MCPP.
This policy incoherence sends mixed signals to investors, development partners, and the international community. It raises legitimate questions about whether Bangladesh is truly committed to its climate promises or merely playing a rhetorical game while continuing business as usual.
听
Undervaluing economic risks and global trends
ENERGY systems around the world are undergoing seismic shifts. The costs of solar, wind and battery storage have plummeted. Investors are moving away from coal and gas. Global capital is increasingly flowing towards green infrastructure, and countries are competing to attract this investment. Bangladesh risks being left behind if it clings to outdated energy models.
The IEPMP fails to internalise the full economic risks of fossil fuel lock-in, including stranded assets, fuel price volatility and climate-induced disasters. It also does little to explore innovative financing mechanisms like blended finance, climate bonds or public-private partnerships that could unlock investments in renewables. By ignoring these trends, the plan undermines the country鈥檚 energy security and economic competitiveness.
An equitable energy transition is not just about technology or in