The last trolleybus of Bishkek: mayor’s decision defies logic and undermines foreign investments in green transport

Bishkek’s residents are at a loss as the city clumsily revamps its transport and mobility system. The mayor’s office has begun implementing a controversial plan to transfer the city’s existing trolleybus system to the country’s regional centres and replace them with regular buses – resulting in public outcry. Travelling and commuting around the city have become increasingly difficult as both the city trolleybuses and marshrutkas (privately run minibus services) are phased out, electric as well as compressed natural gas buses are phased in, routes are changed, and road infrastructure is renovated. 

The city originally justified the decision to remove the trolleybuses, purchased under an EBRD loan, with a plan to procure electric buses with the help of the USD 50 million, financed through the ADB’s Urban Transport Electrification project.  Yet both banks have been tangled up in a situation where poor decision making, lack of consultations and complete miscoordination between the players is undermining the benefits of their investments.  

Mysterious ways of decision-making 

Bishkek desperately needs to upgrade its transport system and significantly extend its public transport fleet to accommodate the needs of the rising population while combatting devastating air pollution levels. However, 120 electric buses purchased with funding from the ADB’s project are not enough to replace the existing electric trolleybus infrastructure. The city claims to have further plans to extend the bus fleet, including adding compressed natural gas buses – hardly a justifiable strategy to tackle Bishkek’s grave air pollution. 

This plan, which the city announced in spring 2024, is particularly controversial because the existing electric trolleybuses in Bishkek not only represent the most environmentally friendly transportation mode but were also purchased recently with financial support provided by the EBRD. The EBRD’s project, consisting of a USD 8.5 million grant and a USD 15 million loan, upgraded the city’s trolleybus fleet and infrastructure by 2018. This upgrade supported the development of 11 trolleybus routes along Bishkek streets carrying up to 20 million residents a year.  

Six years later, no clear and transparent information about the removal of trolleybuses was provided to Bishkek residents. Local activists have therefore raised the alarm, bringing the issue to the attention of both the ADB and the EBRD. They also started a massive public campaign under the banner ‘The Last Trolleybus’ to raise city residents’ awareness about the city’s controversial and costly decision to transfer the trolleybuses to other cities. This has included a petition, public marches and various public actions to prevent the city’s plan. Ignoring civil society’s role in decision-making, the local authorities have already started dismantling trolleybus cables in parts of Bishkek, even though public consultations are still ongoing. 

Did the banks’ response fall on deaf ears? 

Nonetheless, the public advocacy efforts have caught the attention of the development banks. In communication with the local activists, the ADB refuted any knowledge of the city’s plans to dismantle and transfer the trolleybus infrastructure system to other cities, claiming the Bank’s transport project served to substitute only a few outdated vehicles and not replace the whole trolleybus system. The EBRD, on the other hand, has made a formal request to city hall, expressing its concerns about the decision, reminding the mayor’s office that any plans to transfer the trolleybuses purchased through the Bank’s loan agreement would be in breach of the city’s contractual obligations. The Bank’s letter cites that the trolleybuses originally procured under the EBRD’s loan were intended for the city of Bishkek only and were not subject to resale or transfer to other cities without the Bank’s approval.   

Last week during public hearings on the matter, the city council halted a decision to transfer 100 Bishkek trolleybuses to the country’s regional centre Osh. Yet, Bishkek Mayor Aibek Dzhunushaliev is adamant about ‘cleaning the city of trolleybus cable lines and running modern mobile buses’ instead. At the same time, he provided no further details on whether the new bus fleet will be able to cover the city’s needs. There are further issues: buses running on compressed natural gas will increase costs, as imported gas is far more expensive than Kyrgyz electricity from hydropower, so they do not present an adequate environmental replacement to existing electric trolleybuses. Even the electric buses procured under the ADB project will not reach the streets until 2025 at the earliest. The mayor’s office has made no public comment in reply to the EBRD’s letter regarding the city’s contractual obligations.   

Bankwatch recently published a research study produced in collaboration with our Kyrgyz partners Peshcom that examines the state of Bishkek’s urban transport as well as its development objectives (both on a local policy level and in terms of development financing). It reveals specific problems the city is facing due to lack of transparency and consistency in its approach to the ongoing and planned transport development initiatives.  As an example, the current Concept of public transport development of Bishkek for the years 2023-2026 does not mention any plans to remove trolleybuses from the city. Authorities have provided no clear and comprehensive information to justify the proposal or rationalise what sounds like enormous costs for the removal and transfer of trolleybuses and electric substations to another city. Consistent with Peshсom’s study, this seems to be yet another impulsive decision made with no proper planning, preparation or prior consultations with experts or city residents. 

Sweeping the mess under the rug or better coordination and planning? 

Unfortunately, Bishkek, which is heavily reliant on international investments, seems to approach urban transport development in a very inconsistent, uncoordinated and, as recent events show, possibly even irresponsible way. Considering the EBRD’s declared commitments to development of the city’s transport strategy as part of its original investment project and the ADB’s plans to upgrade city’s trolleybus depots, it would be good to hear from the banks about the results of such work.  

Both banks should conduct impact assessments of their role and coordinate their efforts with local authorities, experts and the public to avoid harm and deliver beneficial and meaningful changes to the city. 

The ADB and the EBRD should ensure that cities receiving funding comply with their commitments to produce urban development action plans including comprehensive transport development strategies prior to or as part of their investment programmes. Multilateral development banks should also improve communication and collaboration during the project planning stages to avoid mishandling of investment resources by their clients.