Search

The article assesses India's views on the evolving liberal international economic order through an analysis of India's 2023 G20 presidency. Despite the G20's commitment to strong, sustainable, balanced, and inclusive growth (SSBIG), economic and social performance and prospects for the least developed economies have steadily deteriorated over the past decade, further compounded by the Covid-19 pandemic, geopolitical polarization and the return of war in Europe. India used the G20 as a platform to craft a distinctive, heterodox view on contemporary growth and development challenges to support its own economic rise and to provide political and intellectual leadership of the Global South. It also brokered the induction of the African Union as a full member of the G20. Through effective economic diplomacy, India's presidency delivered a consensus Leaders' document that articulates a heterodox growth and development model for itself and other emerging and developing countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In an era where sustainability is paramount, this study critically assesses how multilateral development banks (MDBs) integrate internationally recognized sustainability indicators into their ESG safeguard policies. MDBs have historically incorporated policies to manage environmental and social risks in project financing; yet, protections against negative impacts in developing countries often remain insufficient. On the other hand, several infrastructure sustainability rating systems have been established around the world in recent decades due to economic growth and the importance of controlling environmental impacts associated with the construction sector. The purpose of this study was to analyze whether and how the indicators that these internationally recognized systems use to rate whether a project is sustainable are integrated into these safeguards by using several methodologies, including an analysis of existing documentation, a high-level matrix, and qualitative methods based on co-occurrences using specialized "atlas ti" software. The results show that MDBs' coverage of financial, governance, and country risks lacks the sustainability focus found in these rating systems. Therefore, this study that concludes MDB safeguards must evolve, balancing comprehensive sustainability parameters and detailed management guidelines and addressing impacts beyond statutory frameworks to encourage stakeholder engagement for more sustainable infrastructure projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multilateral development bank (MDB) engagement with 'gender' is controversial in review and uneven in practice. The authors analyse 1,928 gender-focused projects financed by the World Bank and regional development banks between 1967 and 2021. We propose three eras into which MDB gender engagement divides and argues that isomorphic pressures have aligned their approaches. The article concludes that gender is not an investment priority and projects have conceptually narrowed over time to focus on private entrepreneurship at the expense of addressing systemic gendered inequalities. This is significant for what the MDB finance signals to investors the feasibility of development projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) have been a vital source of funds for the global South in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in the healthcare sector. Prior to the pandemic, the big MDBs' approach to healthcare reflected the post-Washington Consensus, that is a largely neoliberal agenda perpetuating the expansion of private healthcare markets through financialization mechanisms, though with some emphasis on a minimal level of universal healthcare. We studied the MDBs' approaches to healthcare in India to evaluate whether the pandemic resulted in: (a) a re-evaluation of their healthcare models to ensure they were fit for a pandemic; (b) a business-as-usual approach; or (c) a disaster capitalism response exploiting the current socio-economic milieu to further neoliberalization processes. We found that the MDBs adopted an inadequate business-as-usual approach that is intensifying the financialization of healthcare in projects using interventions at the micro through to the macro level. This path dependent approach emphasizing multi-scalar financialization has long-term implications for human well-being. Further, we contend that MDB lending is deepening 'debtfare' through its healthcare and other support, a term Susanne Soederberg (2014, p. 3) conceived to describe the way neoliberal states 'mediate, normalise and discipline the monetised relations that inhabit the poverty industry.' [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the main criticisms of contemporary lending practice by different multilateral public banks in Europe made by scholars and policymakers focuses on overlapping loans, which can create duplications and inefficiencies. However, no database exists on the lending overlaps between these banks. With the aim of analysing these overlaps, all lending by the two major multilateral public banks in Europe, the European Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, were merged into a single database. This new database allows researchers to assess lending overlap, regarding its size, evolution, and geography, facilitating an inquiry into the extent to which banks coordinate this overlapping lending. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The COVID-19 pandemic led to a steep rise in demand for COVID-recovery lending and a decrease in capacity for infrastructure borrowing in many countries struggling to cope with its economic effects. This has presented a significant challenge to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), as its project pipelines had been developed mainly for traditional infrastructure lending. This paper examines the strategies employed by the AIIB to adapt to the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings showcase how its institutional leadership effectively employed its authority, resources, and leadership competences to push for an adaptive response strategy. This was achieved by pitching a response based on the expansion of the AIIB's operational scope beyond traditional heavy infrastructure lending and the introduction of new policy instruments for funding COVID-recovery projects. The AIIB also engaged in collaborative partnerships with other MDBs to access their project pipelines and expertise. Thanks to these efforts, the AIIB not only managed to cope with the challenge, but its leadership also ensured the institution would come out of the pandemic having opportunistically benefited from it. The findings speak to the scholarship on IO resilience and bureaucratic politics. The analysis relies on official documents and original data from 20 interviews with IO officials and experts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article conducts an analysis of the BRICS member countries in terms of their national and international institutions, with a special emphasis on how these institutions affect the stability of the global financial system and the promotion of development. To this end, the work was guided by the attributions of national central banks and the role played by the G20 in maintaining international financial stabilization. Additionally, the analysis examines the activities of national development banks and their institutions established within the BRICS nations, such as the Contingent Reserve Arrangement and the New Development Bank. The descriptive method was used to interpret the dynamics of international political and legal relations. The article concludes by recognizing the decreasing significance of multilateral solutions and highlighting the need for the national central and development banks of the BRICS countries to engage in communication with international organizations of financial cooperation.

Global public goods and the contrast to global public bads require a dramatic change in the international monetary system, enforcement capacity, democratic legitimation, the return to regionalism and multilateralism. Pending the emergence of a more equitable global reserve and payments system, an increased use of the Special Drawing Rights, channeled through Multilateral Development Banks, may help managing the transition towards the provision of such global public goods. This would also provide a guidance for the reduction of Central Banks’ balance sheets, the financialization of the economy and an increase of real investment, thus anchoring the whole international economy to a less vulnerable and volatile monetary structure.

The proliferation of concerns over the transparency, accountability, and democracy of international organizations has contributed to an increase in accountability mechanisms to hold global governors to account, by both state and non-state actors. Much of the scholarly focus on this subject has been on how levers of accountability can improve global governance for Member States and actors seeking to improve decision-making, and thus outputs. This article instead examines how individuals and communities, or neglected publics, are using accountability mechanisms designed to provide them with recourse for environmental and social harm. It probes the use of the grievance mechanisms for the multilateral development banks to examine what kinds of actors use them (e.g. international nongovernmental organizations, nongovernmental organizations, or project-affected people [PAP]) and to what effect. To explore these questions, we analyze 500 complaints submitted to the grievance mechanisms of the World Bank Group; the Asian, African, and Inter-American Development Banks; and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. The results demonstrate that claims for recourse come from a range of primarily local actors, but that PAP in developing countries will more often achieve positive outcomes from the grievance mechanism process if they receive assistance from international and national nongovernmental organizations. These findings therefore demonstrate that transnational activists can fulfill a facilitating role as "accountability enablers" and that domestic representatives are especially effective in problem-solving processes, while international representatives are especially effective in compliance processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many investment arbitrations have arisen out of investments financed through aid resources. Yet, the legal framework governing aid disbursements remains mostly unexplored in investment awards and in the literature on international investment law. This article is an initial attempt at identifying the interactions between these two legal orders. It finds that 1) multilateral and bilateral aid institutions are not perfect third parties to the investor-State relationship; rather, they influence the content of investment contracts, supervise contract implementation and have a role to play in dispute prevention and resolution; 2) uncertainties surround the jurisdiction of investment tribunals over aid-financed 'investments'; 3) development institutions may participate as disputing and non-disputing parties in the arbitrations arising out of aid-financed projects. More broadly, the article suggests that the increasing trend of leveraging aid to incentivize private investments warrants an integrated and hence more realistic approach to the different development finance flows. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We use a gravity model to inquire about the factors that influence the amount of public procurement awarded by developing countries with funding from Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs), based on 169 000 contracts. We reach four main conclusions. First, procurement disproportionately benefits firms of low‐ and middle‐income countries and not those of MDBs' larger shareholders. Second, firms of upper‐middle‐income countries can compete successfully with those of developed countries. These two conclusions are in line with MDBs' development mandate. However, we also find that certain MDBs favour domestic firms and that having good diplomatic relations matters when awarding contracts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The European Investment Bank Complaint Mechanism (EIB CM) reviews complaints about acts or omissions of the European Investment Bank (EIB) for non-compliance with the EIB's obligation and proposes corrective solutions. This article analyzes the potential and limitations of the EIB CM as an accountability mechanism. It reviews the EIB CM's case law related to the environmental and social impacts of financed projects and makes comparisons with the operating documents of the accountability mechanisms of other development banks. The analysis indicates that, despite several shortcomings, the complaints review of the EIB CM has significant potential. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Asian Development Bank/ADB and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank/AIIB are two multilateral institutions created in the Asia-Pacific region. Both aim to promote the development of their area of activity (BAII is also authorized by its statutes to operate in countries that are not regional members). The presence of European Union shareholder countries (or countries with a similar international perspective) in both Banks and their commitment and performance in them make both institutions privileged forums for international and global discussion on the main themes related to Development. Furthermore, the fact that both Banks recognize, among others, the Sustainable Development Goals (Agenda 2030) and the Paris Agreement as their main strategic objectives allows for a common and rational dialogue between countries, continents and regions, even if based from diverse cultural and intellectual backgrounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Multilateral development banks (MDBs) play a pivotal role in financing water and sanitation infrastructure projects and thus have a major impact on the development of basic services. Although information about the MDBs' investments is publicly available, it is dispersed and not easily comparable. A comprehensive compilation of MDBs' water and sanitation investments has long been lacking. To address this gap, we assess water and sanitation financing by the three MDBs most relevant to Africa and Asia between 1960 and 2020: the World Bank, the African Development Bank, and the Asian Development Bank. We compile a new dataset by drawing on 3,639 water and sanitation projects and assess territorial trends, technology choices, distribution of financial burdens, and reforms to institutional arrangements. We find that MDBs' investments align with changing patterns of urbanization and increasingly finance sanitation infrastructures including non-sewered technologies. However, our results also suggest that institutional reforms have addressed utility efficiency through investment in equipment and skills rather than through increased commercialization and private sector participation. The leverage effect of MDB investment on private financing is negligible, whereas co-financing from local governments dominates. HIGHLIGHTS New dataset on multilateral development bank (MDB) investment in water supply and sanitation between 1960 and 2020.; MDB investment aligns to urbanization trend and moves towards integration.; MDB's leverage for private finance is negligible.; Co-financing from recipient governments dominates.;

The notion of “transnational” law encompasses a sophisticated corpus of globally applicable rules, standards and safeguards, often informal in origin, which are widely accepted around the world and supported across a range of business sectors and civil society constituencies. The recent proliferation of such “transnational” law extends to the hydropower sector, where normative standards and safeguards increasingly apply to promote and certify sustainable practices in the development and operation of hydropower projects. Such projects are associated with significant environmental and social impacts and the projected increase in hydropower investments, mainly in emerging economies, will require effective supplemental regulatory tools. Many such projects will be located in, or impact upon, international rivers, thereby adding a further layer of complexity regarding their effective regulation and increased the risk of inter-State disputes over the equitable use of shared waters. Such complexity and risk will be exacerbated by increased uncertainty due to climate change. Thus, the existence of widely accepted transnational standards, which are relevant and applicable to hydropower development globally, can play a key role in building trust between watercourse States and in promoting greater transboundary water cooperation. This article explores the potential role of transnational standards in improved regulation of environmental and social impacts associated with hydropower projects located on international watercourses and the extent to which such standards cohere with established and emerging requirements of international water law. It thus examines the synergies arising between these informal and formal regulatory frameworks with a view to developing a better understanding of their interaction in practice. In so doing, it focuses on two key categories of applicable transnational regime: a sustainability certification and labeling scheme dedicated to hydropower projects and operated by the Hydropower Sustainability Council; and MDB environmental and social safeguard standards imposed upon major water-related projects, including hydropower projects, particularly those adopted by the World Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD).

Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) are extensively involved in the Paris Climate Agreement and play a key role in climate finance. However, the amounts recently channeled to carbon-based projects may raise doubts about this involvement. This empirical approach seeks to explore whether MDB participation actually favors renewable energy projects in developing countries, aligning with their commitment to this Agreement. An empirical analysis is conducted to explore the determinants of MDBs’ participation in energy infrastructure projects developed in 64 countries using data from 2011 to 2018 obtained from the World Bank’s Private Participation in Infrastructure Database. The results reveal that MDBs’ participation is higher in renewable energy projects, confirming their commitment to clean energy; however, this is not confirmed by the amount of financial support provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), a newly created international institution, provides an opportunity to study the extent and efficacy of rights protection against the backdrop of human rights criticism directed at other multilateral development banks (MDBs). The analytical framework is formed by the so-called anticipatory institution-building positing that international organisations adopt safeguards without external pressure due to having learnt from the mistakes of peer organisations. The article explores the context in which China created the AIIB and the ensuing expectations regarding its environmental and social safeguards. Specific institutional traits gear the Bank towards being 'lean, clean and green' while simultaneously formally paying due regard to environmental and social risks in development lending. The investigation of the Bank's Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) reveals that it largely resembles the operational safeguards of other MDBs while still being a 'work in progress'. It is argued that rights protection remains trapped between institutional infancy problems and principled indifference. Efficiency prevails over protection, the applicability of the ESF is fragmented, central rights receive inadequate protection, and accountability mechanisms remain untested. While the ESF review will remedy some of the shortcomings, infrastructure lending cannot completely do away with adverse environmental and social impacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the climate crisis intensifies, the need to improve the climate resilience of developing countries is ever increasing. Hence, the international community is seeking ways to effectively conduct climate technology transfer by linking the projects with financial mechanisms. However, commercialization of climate technology in developing countries is no easy feat as comprehensive knowledge on the target country is a prerequisite for seeking a suitable technology-financial linkage measure. Hence, in-depth discussions on effective climate technology and financial linkage measures have become an important global agenda, and South Korea, as a country with long experience in climate technology transfer, and a strong ecosystem for public climate technology, should step forward to take up a leading role. Against this backdrop, this paper proposes strategies and implementation measures for linking funds from the Multilateral Development Banks (MDB) with Korea’s Public Climate Technology (PCT) by examining several key areas of R&D, international cooperation, and technology commercialization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

External financing for development represents a complex area of the global agenda that encompasses political, economic, geopolitical and financial aspects. Over time, international actors and financing instruments have multiplied and become more complex. For this reason, and considering the implications of the matter for South America, the objective of this article is to inquire about the operations of the OPEC Fund for International Development (OFID) in the region, since it is an organization insufficiently analyzed by the discipline of International Relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Achieving the ambitious climate goals established on the international agenda for boosting sustainable development involves significant financial resources. Therefore, the funds allocated by the financial system for green investments should increase globally. Against this backdrop our paper investigates the role of multilateral development banks in promoting green finance, with focus on Romania. The research results underline their engagement to combat climate change and to support sustainable development. The European Investment Bank, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Finance Corporation have major contributions in financing green projects in Romania in areas such as energy efficiency, green building, clean transportation, sustainable agriculture. To this end they established some partnerships with Romanian financial institutions, granted financing facilities, invested in the green bonds issued by local banks, provided technical assistance. However, our main finding shows that green finance in Romania is still limited, requiring increased commitments in this area, including from multilateral development banks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The World Bank today faces parallel challenges to its operations and governance. The institution has since its founding provided financing on favourable terms to developing country governments to support national development efforts. Alongside these country demands, there are now calls for a new set of mandates and activities associated with global public goods. Advocates would have the Bank allocate large sums toward climate mitigation, pandemic response and preparedness, and other activities that may or may not align with national priorities in developing countries. The ability of the World Bank to strike an appropriate balance between country demands and global goods depends on the institution's shareholders. Yet, the deterioration in the bilateral relationship between the United States and China now threatens to undermine effective governance at the institution. This paper considers the challenge of competing demands on World Bank resources and the degree to which a resolution could depend on an agreement between the United States and China, one that sets the strategic direction of the institution and addresses the growing impasse on the question of China's shareholding in the Bank. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper discusses Brazil's strategic position in multilateral development banks. Considering the emergence of two major geopolitical poles in the 21st century, expressed in the Sino-American rivalry, and the importance of multilateralism in this context, it is argued that Brazil is well positioned in three spaces: whether in institutions traditionally led by the United States; in the new banks of China's emerging leadership; or in exclusively Latin American ones. Due to its presence in these three spheres, both as a relevant shareholder and a strong borrower, Brazil has great capacity to play a constructive role in these institutions, proactively cooperating in the three spaces to make strategic use of these instruments to support its development. Finally, it is proposed to reinforce the Brazilian contribution to multilateralism through working on: i) governance coordination; ii) consider new capital contributions; and iii) contribute to funds managed by multilateral banks to support development agendas.

The reforms carried out recently in the Republic of Uzbekistan have caused a wide discussion. For many, the speed with which the liberalization of the economy is carried out, as well as the scale of transformations, came as a surprise. Being one of the most closed economies in the post-Soviet space five years ago, Uzbekistan managed not only to catch up with the progressive countries of the former Soviet Union, but also to do so with relatively small social consequences. As shown in the article, the “Uzbek miracle” was caused by three factors. Firstly, the reforms were prepared in advance. Secondly, after the change in the policy of multilateral development banks in terms of the conditions they set for issuing loans to governments, recapitalizing (in some cases) these organizations and optimizing their balance sheets, their ability to provide loans has expanded. In addition, criticism from the international community has stimulated multilateral development banks to take a more careful approach to the choice of tools used when working with borrowing states and literally “create” stories of successful transformation of national economies. Thirdly, the national development Institutes of the People’s Republic of China and Japan have been active in working with the Government of the Republic of Uzbekistan to implement projects aimed at modernizing the old and building new infrastructure. They have invested significant resources to transform certain sectors of the Uzbek economy. Financial institutions of European and Arab states also cooperate with the Uzbek government.Based on the matrix of projects compiled with the volumes of planned investments in the context of institutions and spheres of economic activity, the author pointed out sectors of the Uzbek economy that are the most attractive for individual foreign economic partners of the republic. The rapid growth of the state external debt of the republic has caused a discussion in the country about the effectiveness of the use of foreign loans, as well as the establishment of an upper limit on international borrowing. At the current stage, the Republic of Uzbekistan does not intend to reduce the amount of assistance it attracts from international financial organizations (at the same time, the public debt ceiling will still be set), since, together with loans, these institutions, as a rule, allocate funds free of charge for the preparation of projects and advisory assistance to the Government of the Republic of Uzbekistan.

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.

Of all international organisations, Multilateral Development Banks (MDB) are not the most well-known nor the most scrutinised neither by the academy nor the public. However, they play a major role as financial institutions for the purpose of development. The article, drawing on the broader field of Humanitarian Aid and Aid for Development discusses the role of those agencies, particularly with reference to the connections between the humanitarian and the development dimensions, and within this later case, assessing their efforts in order to tackle poverty and to abide by sustainability concerns. The conclusion highlights some of the main findings, mainly with reference to two cases, the European Development Bank (EIB) and the New Development Bank (NDB).

Does China exert influence over the AIIB, including its share allocation, to pursue its interests as many skeptical eyes suggest? What explains the subscription shares a member state has at the AIIB? Building upon existing literature on American influence in international financial institutions, we propose a unique theoretical argument on these questions. While most of the extant literature focuses on the US dispensing patronage to politically-economically proximate states, we suggest that China may not be so inclined. Instead, we theorize that states that are a priori distant from China might obtain higher shares relative to their GDP at the AIIB. We reason that this outcome is due to the benefits China faces in attracting more distant states (the supply side) as well as the political costs more distant states face in joining the AIIB (the demand side). More distant states are likely to demand more shares given their higher costs of membership, and China is inclined to accommodate these demands both for institutional legitimacy and the potential benefit of attracting distant countries closer to itself. Our evidence—from multiple interviews with top policy-makers and statistical analysis—provides robust support for our theoretical arguments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Climate change has exposed significant urban vulnerabilities in the Global North and South, leading to calls for sustainable, green, and climate-resilient (SGR) cities. The multilateral development banks (MDBs) financed projects and established initiatives to promote SGR cities during the 2010s. This article qualitatively analyses 60 SGR city projects financed by seven MDBs between December 2009 and August 2020. The contribution of the article is to analyse what the MDBs are financing: What types of projects are being approved? What are their objectives and components? What outcomes are hoped to be achieved? As a microcosm of broader MDB climate interventions, the article evaluates what the MDBs are prioritizing in their SGR city projects and what this means for development and climate change. The article concludes that while the projects advocate interventions to address climate change, maintain economic growth, and build more equitable cities, they conform to a narrow focus on infrastructural development, a technology-based approach that is uncertain to address the complex social and economic factors leading to human-induced climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Acta Humana - Human Rights Publication is the property of National University of Public Service and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Until now, the processes of global regionalisation have not been adequately reflected in the formation of systemic approaches to the management of financial relations within the Eurasian Economic Union. It leads to the search for new financial policy mechanisms necessary to stimulate the economies of the EAEU countries in the context of emerging economic and geopolitical constraints, as well as the creation of the necessary prerequisites for industrial cooperation in the context of anti-Russian sanctions and de-globalisation trends intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently, the vulnerability of the economies of the EAEU member states is due to their extreme dependence on external extra-regional demand, international capital and technology markets, as well as international settlement and payment systems based on the US dollar. The study is based on a dialectical approach. In conducting the research, we used general scientific methods of analysis, synthesis, generalisation, as well as methods of systemic, historical-logical and comparative analysis. The contradictory nature of the development of the world economy at the present stage was revealed. The role of the EDB in creating conditions for sustainable development of the EAEU member states has been substantiated. Changes in the structure of the EDB’s investment portfolio were analysed. The advantages and disadvantages of the EDB’s current activities in the context of the implementation of the Bank’s Strategy for 2018–2020 were summarised. Comparative characteristics of financing of EDB member countries through multilateral development banks were presented. The impact of the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic on the current and future activities of the EDB was shown.

This paper looks at the role, evolution, and regional coverage of the system of multilateral and national development banks (MDBs and NDBs). It analyzes the roles that development banks should play to correct the market failures that characterize financial systems, particularly in emerging and developing countries. It concludes that MDBs should be capitalized to better support emerging and developing countries' recovery after the COVID-19 crisis. They should also be aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals, and enhance their role in promoting innovation and structural transformation, and supporting climate change mitigation and adaptation. It underscores that the development banks should work as a system and that better networking between MDBs and NDBs is essential and should be systematically monitored. Finally, it points out that MDBs should support the development of strong NDBs in the regions where these institutions are underrepresented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Motivation: Climate change is exposing significant urban vulnerabilities. The multilateral development banks (MDBs) have responded by devising a suite of sustainable, green, and resilient (SGR) city advisory services and lending products to prepare cities for future climate change impacts. Purpose: The article comparatively analyses SGR city action plans and companion projects drafted by the MDBs. It thus evaluates the translation of analytical work into investments, reviewing what the MDBs are prioritizing and what this means for development and climate change. Methods and approach: The article qualitatively analyses 124 SGR city action plans and 65 companion lending operations approved by four MDBs between 2014 and 2021, evaluating action plan documents and project appraisal, implementation, and results reports. Findings: The article finds that while the SGR city action plans propose comprehensive recommendations, the companion projects narrowly focus on infrastructural upgrades that are uncertain to adequately prepare cities for future climate change impacts. Policy implications: Multilateral interventions targeting climate change expanded considerably during the 2010s. The MDBs, however, continue to prioritize project‐based infrastructural investments financing climate mitigation and resilience actions over more substantive climate adaptation initiatives. This article thus shows that SGR city action plans hold great potential to enact robust and inclusive climate responses but have so far been stymied by the conservatism of project‐based investment lending. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

International climate finance is key to managing overall climate risk with many developing countries' climate plans and actions are conditional on getting the necessary financial support. Unsurprisingly, helping fund poorer countries to address climate change is one of the most contentious subjects in climate politics. This article examines the state of play and offers some suggestions to unblock the impasse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Development Studies is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Abstract Given their attractiveness as a source of financing for the least developed countries, multilateral development banks (MDBs) have grown in quantity and size supported by their sources of financing. We believe that this ‘resource dependency’ has not been sufficiently questioned in the literature, especially regarding the credit exposure these organizations have with their largest borrowing members. This article characterizes and identifies the differential effects of the three sources that make up the dependence on resources in the MDBs: capital contributions, leverage in the markets and their credit function. We analysed these sources particularly at the International Development Bank (IBRD), the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and the African Development Bank (AfDB) and in two recent events: the risk exchange implemented by the referred MDBs in 2015 and the effect of the Argentina’s selective default on the IDB’s capital adequacy (2014). We find an increasing relevance of leverage and the size of loans, which models a dependence on resources that weakens the development mandate of these organizations.

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]

Copyright of Mural Internacional is the property of Editora da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (EdUERJ) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) represent the backbone of global economic development because they account for creating private initiatives, innovation, and employment. In the wake of the Coronavirus outbreak, the SMEs were strongly affected, both from the demand and supply of products and services, tightening the ability to gather financial resources in order to meet short term liquidity demands and working capital requirements. Since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments and multilateral development banks (MDBs) have provided financial resources to SMEs in order to tackle the effects of lockdown. This paper aims to characterize and assess current measures and initiatives adopted by MDBs to support SMEs. We highlight that international financial institutions act countercyclically in securing businesses and supporting jobs. The paper underlines the importance of transparency, a correct evaluation of risks and fiscal costs, and strong governance while dealing with MDBs support.

In this research, we study, for the first time, the determinants of private investment participation in public–private partnership (PPPs) projects in renewable energies. We analyse a broad sample formed by 1,371 PPPs from 63 developing countries in the period 1997–2016. Using a Tobit estimation technique, our findings reveal that PPPs that are smaller, younger, where the private partner takes more responsibilities, and the prime revenue source comes from the electricity consumers' payments, show a greater degree of private investors' participation. In addition, better institutional and economic environments impact positively on the attractiveness of private investment. Other interesting findings are that the support of multilateral development banks (MDBs) positively affects the participation of private investors in renewable energy PPPs, and this becomes more important when the institutional and economic frameworks are weaker. The article sheds light for practitioners and policymakers on promoting actions that reinforce the determinants that positively affect private participation. In this way, government actions that promote the institutional financing of third parties, as well as improvements to their institutions and economic environment, enable efforts to be prioritised due to the positive impact it has on private participation. Similarly, good indicators of these factors allow private investors to select projects that will be more successful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]