Search

Abstract Initiated in 2017 and formally established in 2020, the Multilateral Cooperation Center for Development Finance (MCDF) is the latest addition to the development finance landscape in Asia. This article provides an in‐depth analysis of MCDFʼs potential to offer additionality in development finance and its political legitimacy by comparing it to 18 development finance and capacity‐building organisations. The article finds that while the MCDF contributes to closing the substantial infrastructure financing gap in Asia, it risks overlapping with existing initiatives to such a degree that it may become an inefficient use of resources while lacking legitimacy as a multilateral organisation due to its unclear relationship with Chinaʼs Belt and Road Initiative. From this outset, and given the climate mandates of its multilateral development bank members, this article finds that if the MCDF focuses specifically on green and climate finance, it could carve out an area where it can become a much‐needed new platform for project development and coordination.

Initiated in 2017 and formally established in 2020, the Multilateral Cooperation Center for Development Finance (MCDF) is the latest addition to the development finance landscape in Asia. This article provides an in‐depth analysis of MCDFʼs potential to offer additionality in development finance and its political legitimacy by comparing it to 18 development finance and capacity‐building organisations. The article finds that while the MCDF contributes to closing the substantial infrastructure financing gap in Asia, it risks overlapping with existing initiatives to such a degree that it may become an inefficient use of resources while lacking legitimacy as a multilateral organisation due to its unclear relationship with Chinaʼs Belt and Road Initiative. From this outset, and given the climate mandates of its multilateral development bank members, this article finds that if the MCDF focuses specifically on green and climate finance, it could carve out an area where it can become a much‐needed new platform for project development and coordination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article offers three arguments outlining the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank's significance and to help policy planners navigate the complex relationship between China, the Bank and themes of sustainability. First, there is little uncertainty that China is serious about development and sustainability. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is but one extension of China's increasing commitment to sustainability and should therefore be embraced by development stakeholders. Second, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank's commitment to infrastructure development complements other multilateral development banks and should not be considered a challenger to the existing order of development lending practices. Rather, China's interest in establishing the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank points to competitive pluralism and poses no threat to the existing international order. Finally, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank's sustainability guidelines are not unique and fall in line with similar policy of other large development banks. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank therefore reinforces sustainability norms while posturing itself as a partner for development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]