Loading…
Loading…
ADB, the region's dominant multilateral development bank, extended a USD 50 million green loan directly to Shouguang Luli Wood Inc (Luli Wood) — a subsidiary of the diversified Luli Group and one of the PRC's largest OSB producers, holding FSC and PEFC chain-of-custody certification — to fund a new OSB factory, associated facilities, and a captive biomass power plant in Jiangxi Province, alongside general working-capital needs. The engineered OSB panels use wood waste (branches, twigs, small trees from smallholder farmers) plus ~10% fast-growing bamboo rather than old-growth timber; production waste is burned in the co-located biomass plant to supply the factory's own electricity and steam. ADB's stated impact case is ~200,000 tCO2e/year of avoided emissions, 1,500 direct jobs, and additional income for the smallholder wood suppliers feeding the mill.
This follows the same template as the December 2025 multilateral development-bank intermediated- and direct-financing wave already logged in this register (EIB-ALTANA, EIB-IKB, AfDB-KCB Bank, BNDES-Suzano): a development bank extending below-market capital directly to a named commercial producer that competes internationally, which GTA flags as a "state loan" harmful intervention regardless of the loan's green/climate framing. Severity is kept low (2) — in line with the Suzano/Kenya-AfDB precedent band — reflecting a single-project loan of moderate size (USD 50m) rather than a market-wide policy shift; the quant basis is the disclosed USD 50 million (CNY 353.63m) facility size.
cluster (EIB, NIB, AfDB) to a Chinese wood-products manufacturer — underscores that ADB's green-lending book reaches PRC private manufacturers directly, not just PRC sovereign/quasi-sovereign borrowers.
producers relative to unsubsidized competitors, with a downstream smallholder-income and circular-economy framing that gives the loan political cover beyond a pure industrial subsidy.
capital were not disclosed in the ADB press release.
purely domestic PRC construction/furniture demand) is not specified — relevant to whether this constitutes an export-competitiveness subsidy or a purely domestic-market intervention.