SDGs. Billions to trillions. South-South development cooperation. Development finance. If these terms resonate with you (positively or negatively), and you’ve never heard of the International Development Finance Club (IDFC), you should rectify that. At least, that’s the conclusion we’ve drawn after a year-long study of the IDFC and its member institutions. This work has culminated in a new CGD report, The International Development Finance Club and the Sustainable Development Goals: Impact, Opportunities, and Challenges.
CGD Policy Blogs
CGD senior fellow Scott Morris on how the International Development Finance Club institutions could increase their development impact, and, in light of the passage of the BUILD act earlier this year, how the new US Development Finance Corporation can get off to a good start.
It is now abundantly clear that aid money will provide only a fraction of the resources needed to reach the Sustainable Development Goals. That realization came early on, and it was a central theme of the Addis Financing for Development conference of 2015, held before the SDGs were even signed.
What would it look like today if major multilateral finance institutions like the World Bank had never adopted the climate agenda as a binding constraint on their operations? Unfortunately, we have a real-world approximation of that hypothetical in the form of Chinese development finance. At least, that’s a conclusion I draw from an important new report from World Resources Institute (WRI) and Boston University, Moving the Green Belt and Road Initiative: From Words to Actions.
Donors are considering a proposal for a new “innovative finance mechanism” to increase funding for education, based on recommendations from Gordon Brown’s Education Commission. We agree that we need to finance an expansion of education in the developing world. But sadly, the International Finance Facility for Education (IFFEd) proposal is too good to be true. Using donor guarantees to increase lending by multilateral banks could increase the supply of loans—but there are simpler ways to do that without setting up a new facility.
The IDFC represents a unique mix of bilateral agencies, national development banks, and regional development banks. As such, it holds promise for bringing new and productive collaborations to the SDG agenda that extend well beyond the work of the major multilateral development institutions. In a new brief, our efforts to map the scale and scope of IDFC members’ development financing through a membership survey and public databases provide some interesting takeaways:
In 2019, major sources of concessional finance—the big global health funders like the Global Fund and Gavi, as well as the development-bank-based IDA and the African Development Fund—will ask donors for more money to accomplish more health and development.
After toiling away for decades in relative obscurity, DFIs have found themselves thrust into the limelight and told to transform “billions to trillions,” to fill the yawning SDG financing gap.
The International Finance Corporation wants to increase support for both private sector-led development and fragile states. But how viable are these goals?
The Eminent Persons Group (EPG), tasked with making the system of international financial institutions fit for purpose in the 21st century, recently gave the G20 Finance Ministers a preliminary report on its work.The report is a bit long on generalities and short on specifics and, as my colleague Nancy Birdsall blogs, it mostly shies away from suggesting concrete adjustments in the way the multilateral development bank (MDB) system works now. Here are eight ideas that the EPG could propose that can be implemented in the next two years.