In 2016 on the CGD Podcast, we have discussed some of development's biggest questions: How do we pay for development? How do we measure the sustainable development goals (SDGs)? What should we do about refugees and migrants? And is there life yet in the notion of globalism? The links to all the full podcasts featured and the work they reference are below, but in this edition, we bring you highlights of some of those conversations.
CGD Policy Blogs
The 18th "replenishment" of the World Bank's International Development Association (IDA) opened the door to a major source of non-donor financing in the years ahead, which will mean—to put it bluntly—that the World Bank can now literally afford to say no to the United States and other major donors like the United Kingdom and Japan on a range of policy matters.
To say that John Bolton, President-elect Trump’s expected pick for #2 at the State Department, is a well-known UN critic would be an understatement. But it’s well worth noting that he has opinions about the IMF and the multilateral development banks too.
Here at CGD, much of what we have to say is based on a core premise that too often goes unstated. Namely, that US development policy, with bipartisan support, has made steady progress over many years as one of the more effective things our government does. It is, day in and day out, advancing US interests around the world and at home. It’s a time of fundamental uncertainty about the future direction of US development policy, so let’s talk fundamentals.
CGD founding president Nancy Birdsall has seen a few US presidents come and go in her long career as a leading development economist, but her message to all occupants of the White House has remained fairly steady: Enact smart policies that help developing countries build stable, prosperous economies of their own—and that will help people at home too. This week she joins the CGD Podcast to talk about some of those ideas, and why development should be a priority for the next US president.
The multilateral development banking (MDB) system is regarded as having been remarkably successful—but is the model still fit for purpose? CGD president Nancy Birdsall and senior fellow Scott Morris delve into a new CGD report's recommendations on how to make MDBs more effective.
Finance and development ministers gathered in Washington this weekend at the World Bank’s annual meetings have an ambitious agenda of topics to discuss. But the truth is, it is not nearly ambitious enough. A new CGD report by a high level commission of development and finance experts explains why and what should happen.
At the moment, the issue of US leadership at the multilateral development banks (MDBs) is focused squarely on the World Bank presidency. But there’s a lot more to it than that, and a lot more at risk for the United States in the years ahead. In a new paper for the Council on Foreign Relations, I examine the US role in the MDB system—why it matters for the United States itself, how China has emerged as a game changer, and how the United States is too often its own worst enemy when it comes to effective leadership.
If one thing is for certain following the CGD event, the “Asian Development Bank at 50,” the ADB’s work is far from done, and there will be no lack of ambition on the part of the US government and the bank’s other shareholders when it comes to a forward-looking agenda.
This week, CGD took another step forward in putting the “do” in our mission of being a “think and do tank.” For a number of years, we have hosted policymakers as visiting fellows at the center, a great program that has helped to ground our work in the realities of policymaking. (Of course, as a visiting fellow alumnus, I may be a bit biased!). Now, we are turning this program on its head and sending one of our own, Casey Dunning, into the policy world under a new CGD-sponsored fellowship.