Search

Begin New Search Topic Development Content Type Policy Brief Publishing Institution Center for Global Development Publication Year within 10 Years

1. The ABCs of Sovereign Debt Relief

Author:
Rakan Aboneaaj, Jocilyn Estes, and Clemence Landers
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
We are living in a time when many countries face heightened debt vulnerabilities. Already high before the pandemic, debt levels reached a 50-year peak following the growth in government spending to combat COVID-19. Debt is not inherently bad; borrowing can allow countries to finance vital government investment. But unsustainable levels of debt can have devastating consequences for a country’s population, crowding out government spending on even basic necessities including food, medicine, and fuel imports. In Sri Lanka, for example, 71 percent of government revenue was spent on debt service before the country defaulted. Even where the tradeoff is not so dire, unsustainable debt service can limit productive investments in infrastructure, education, healthcare, and other sectors, hampering the economic growth necessary to reduce a country’s debt burden. After a decade-long period of low borrowing costs, a confluence of rising interest rates, inflation, and commodity shocks have raised the likelihood of overlapping debt crises in developing countries. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) now estimates that 30 percent of emerging market countries and 60 percent of low-income countries could face trouble paying down their debts or will soon. There is no international bankruptcy mechanism for countries that default on their external obligations. Instead, countries have historically depended on a patchwork of precedents, contracts, and conventions to bring creditors to the table for debt relief negotiations. The United States has a legacy as the lead architect of large global debt relief initiatives, from the Brady Bond plan for Latin America to the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative that kickstarted debt relief for poor countries in the 1990s. However, the global creditor landscape has changed significantly over the past decade. Low-income sovereigns’ largest creditors today—China and private bondholders—operate under much different principles than the leading bilateral creditors of the past, making the traditional norms and structures less effective for present debt challenges. The objective of the international financial architecture—historically overseen by the IMF and its shareholders— will be to corral these new creditors into a cooperative arrangement to deliver on debt relief.
Topic:
Debt, Development, Governance, Credit, and Sovereign Debt
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. ABCs of the IFIs: The African Development Fund’s 16th Replenishment

Author:
Jocilyn Estes and Erin Collinson
Publication Date:
08-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Many African countries, particularly those in sub-Saharan Africa, continue to grapple with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic while simultaneously confronting the challenges posed by slowing global growth, private capital outflows, debt distress, and the impacts of climate change. An estimated 55 million people on the continent have been pushed into extreme poverty since the onset of the pandemic. This devastating trend has been exacerbated by the ripple effects of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine—supply chain disruptions, tightening fiscal space, and growing pressure on the cost of food, fuel, and fertilizer. International financial support for the continent has fallen woefully short of levels required to prevent the current crisis from derailing long-term development. The African Development Bank (AfDB) is the largest regional multilateral development finance institution on the continent. It provides critical financial support to countries across the region, including investment in vital infrastructure projects. The African Development Fund (AfDF) is the Bank’s concessional window, providing financing in the form of grants and concessional loans to resource-constrained governments responding to the growing challenges on the continent, including gaps in critical infrastructure and rising debt burdens. Amid ongoing and overlapping global emergencies, the stakes for the AfDF’s upcoming replenishment could hardly be higher. The AfDF is making the case to donors—who will come together later this year for a final meeting of the AfDF’s 16th replenishment (AfDF-16)—that the Fund needs substantial new resources to continue to support African people, businesses, and governments and make up lost ground in the fight against poverty. An ambitious 16th replenishment—coupled with policy and governance reform commitments—presents an opportunity for donors, including the United States, to complement long-standing investments in regional growth and infrastructure, offer a sustainable alternative to non-concessional Chinese lending, and make headway on the long road to economic recovery from the pandemic and worsening food security crisis.
Topic:
Development, Investment, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Africa

3. Breakthrough to Policy Use: Reinvigorating Impact Evaluation for Global Development

Author:
Julia Kaufman, Amanda Glassman, Ruth Levine, and Janeen Madan Keller
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
In 2006, when a CGD working group published its report When Will We Ever Learn? Improving Lives Through Impact Evaluation, very few social programs benefitted from studies that could determine whether they actually make a difference. Since then, there has been tremendous progress in harnessing better evidence to inform public policy decision making, especially from impact evaluations of programs in low- and middle-income countries. Impact evaluation is a rigorous approach that establishes the attributable net impact of a project or program, making it uniquely well suited to inform decision making about resource allocation, program design, and scale up or drawdown. But the COVID-19 pandemic put a spotlight on an unfinished agenda, underscoring the need for high-quality, timely, and context-specific evidence. The pandemic has demonstrated the cost in lives and livelihoods when policymakers make decisions based on incomplete or outdated evidence and data. Approximately 15 million more deaths took place in 2020 and 2021 than would have occurred in the absence of COVID-19, and cumulative economic losses from the pandemic are expected to reach 13.8 trillion. Given the potential real-world benefits, why have decision makers within governments, aid agencies, multilateral organizations, and NGOs not yet fully harnessed the value of evidence—including from impact evaluations—for better public policies? Looking ahead, how can the development community renew momentum and broaden bases of support for impact evaluation and the wider evidence agenda? In response to these questions and building on progress to date, CGD launched the Working Group on New Evidence Tools for Policy Impact. The working group aimed to develop a renewed agenda for investments in impact evaluation and related evidence systems to enhance their value for policy use. It brought together a diverse group of policymakers and experts to review recent progress and examine how to address remaining obstacles to the use and utility of evidence for global development, with a focus on impact evaluation. This brief summarizes the final report of the working group. The report collates resources and insights on progress in implementing and using impact evaluations for decision making and proposes five ways to improve impact evaluation funding and practice, directed to the development community—government policymakers; other multilateral, bilateral, and philanthropic funders; researchers, and NGOs
Topic:
Development, Governance, Leadership, NGOs, and Impact Evaluation
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4. Mainstreaming Evidence Use through Locally Led Development: Recommendations for USAID

Author:
Janeen Madan Keller, Amanda Glassman, Julia Kaufman, and Ruth Levine
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
ince the 2006 release of the CGD report When Will We Ever Learn? Improving Lives Through Impact Evaluation, there have been nearly two decades of progress in generating and using evidence for public policy decisions and development programs. There has been a steady increase in the number of impact evaluations—a rigorous approach that establishes the attributable net impact of a project or program. Their ability to assess attribution makes impact evaluations uniquely well suited for decision making. Nevertheless, the COVID-19 pandemic put a spotlight on an unfinished agenda and underscored the need for high-quality, timely, and context-specific evidence. Across sectors, decision makers in governments, aid agencies, multilateral organizations, and NGOs have not yet fully harnessed the value of evidence for better public policies. Numerous challenges limit evidence use. On the demand side, impact evaluations may lack relevance to policy decisions and fail to respond to decision makers’ priorities, timelines, and questions. On the supply side, decision makers often lack institutional incentives and funding to generate and act on relevant evidence. Current funding models compound these challenges by contributing to misaligned incentives between policymaker needs and academic researchers. In response to these challenges, CGD launched the Working Group on New Evidence Tools for Policy Impact to develop a renewed agenda for the next generation of investments in impact evaluation and related evidence systems to enhance their value for real-world decision making. The group brought together policymakers and experts to review the progress and obstacles to the use and utility of evidence for global development. Its final report highlights how far the field has come in addressing critiques about the scale, generalizability, and policy utility of impact evaluation, and offers recommendations to the development community on “what and how to fund to deliver on the promise of impact evaluation and bolster the broader evidence ecosystem.” The working group proposes five ways to improve impact evaluation funding and practice: (1) design evaluations that start from the policy question and decision space; (2) harness technology for timely, lower-cost evidence; (3) advance locally grounded evidence-to-policy partnerships; (4) enact new incentives and structures to strengthen evidence use; and (5) invest in evidence leaders and communities. This brief details how USAID can mainstream evidence use across the agency. It is based on working group discussions, numerous consultations with experts including current and former USAID staff, and background research over the course of the project.
Topic:
Development, Local, USAID, and Foreign Assistance
Political Geography:
North America, Global Focus, and United States of America

5. ABCs of the IFIs: Understanding IDA20

Author:
Jocilyn Estes and Erin Collinson
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
With the COVID-19 pandemic hitting government balance sheets especially hard in low-income countries, the World Bank’s shareholders—including the United States—agreed to an advance replenishment of its grant and low-interest loan window, the International Development Association (IDA). By holding a pledging session one year early, donors sought to ensure IDA, which serves the world’s poorest countries, would have the resources to provide financing where it was needed most. In December 2021, following the final meeting of the 20th replenishment of IDA (IDA20), the World Bank announced a $93 billion replenishment package, leveraging $23.5 billion in contributions from 48 high- and middle-income countries. The United States reclaimed its position as IDA’s top donor, pledging $3.5 billion over three years to support pandemic response and an economic rebound in the world’s poorest countries. The United States has long had a vested interest in the World Bank, and in IDA in particular, working to ensure it is well run and resourced appropriately, and that its policy agenda reflects US interests. The US Congress plays a pivotal role in overseeing US engagement with the institution—managed by the Treasury Department—and providing funding to enable the US to meet its commitments. Due to the acceleration of IDA19, the US has two IDA installments due this year. The president’s fiscal year 2023 (FY23) budget request includes funding for a final payment to deliver on its IDA19 commitment and a partial first installment toward the latest US pledge to IDA.
Topic:
Development, Multilateralism, Sustainability, and Banking
Political Geography:
North America and United States of America

6. Recommendations for US-Africa Space Cooperation and Development

Author:
Rose Croshier
Publication Date:
03-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
The United States, a leader in space exploration and innovation, has a unique opportunity to establish enduring diplomatic, commercial, and security ties with African nations through space cooperation—with the potential to yield substantial development benefits. The U.S. space sector is robust, an area of comparative strength vis-à-vis Europe, Russia, and China. By driving space cooperation, the U.S. can reinforce the rules-based order as articulated in international agreements like the Artemis Accords. Expanded space capabilities can also support the achievement of several of the UN Sustainable Development Goals, which range from improving data-driven governance to closing the global digital gap. U.S. policymakers have an opportunity to implement a collaborative approach with emerging African space actors both to grow a peaceful and law-abiding community in space and to benefit from Africa's contributions to the global space ecosystem. Space capability can also serve a crucial infrastructure role, yielding similar benefits to “traditional” infrastructure—including facilitating access to 5G connectivity through low orbit satellites and addressing clean water and food security needs through remote sensing and satellite communications.
Topic:
Development, International Cooperation, Space, and Territory
Political Geography:
Africa, North America, and United States of America

7. Mapping China’s Participation in Multilateral Development Institutions and Funds

Author:
Scott Morris, Rowan Rockafellow, and Sarah Rose
Publication Date:
11-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
China has emerged as a leading participant in multilateral development organizations. In many ways, this is a welcome development. Today’s global challenges, including COVID-19 and climate change, require an international response and have prompted renewed calls for increased multilateral engagement by the major economy countries. This, combined with the recognition of multilateral institutions’ high standards for transparency and environmental safeguards, have led the United States at times to encourage China to step up its multilateral contributions. At the same time, countervailing voices focused on strategic competition increasingly view China’s multilateral participation with skepticism. When the People’s Republic of China joined the World Bank in 1980, it was allocated 12,000 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) shares, becoming the Bank’s sixth largest shareholder with 3.47 percent of the of the voting power. By 2013, decades of rapid economic growth had propelled China to its current position as the IBRD’s third largest shareholder, eclipsing France, Germany, and the United Kingdom with 5.03 percent of IBRD voting power. In many ways, China’s rise in stature at the IBRD mirrors its growth in influence across the multilateral development system. This is certainly true of China’s increasing voting share in the World Bank, IMF, and UN system, all of which tie financial contributions to economic size (see Figure 1). But China’s growing importance in the multilateral system is also the product of distinct policy choices made by the Chinese government. These policy choices go beyond the wealth-based financial contributions that dictate IBRD shareholding to include voluntary financing, borrowing, and commercial contracting. In concert, they make China a unique player in the multilateral system by virtue of to its simultaneous roles as a multilateral organization donor, shareholder, aid recipient, and commercial partner.
Topic:
Development, International Cooperation, Multilateralism, and Participation
Political Geography:
China and Asia

8. Rethinking Humanitarian Reform: What Will it Take to Truly Change the System?

Author:
Patrick Saez, Jeremy Konyndyk, and Rose Worden
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
This brief summarizes three years of research under the project, “Rethinking Humanitarian Reform,” led by Jeremy Konyndyk, Patrick Saez, and Rose Worden, and funded by the aid departments of the United Kingdom and Australia. The project aimed to understand the incentives behind the humanitarian system and shift them to better prioritize the needs of affected populations.
Topic:
Development, Humanitarian Aid, Reform, and Institutionalism
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, Australia, and Global Focus

9. The Commitment to Development Index 2021

Author:
Ian Mitchell, Lee Robinson, Beata Cichocka, and Euan Ritchie
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
The Commitment to Development Index (CDI) ranks 40 of the world’s most powerful countries on policies that affect more than five billion people living in poorer nations. Because development is about more than foreign aid, the CDI covers eight distinct policy areas: Development Finance Investment Migration Trade Health Environment Security Technology
Topic:
Security, Development, Environment, Health, Migration, Science and Technology, Finance, Investment, and Trade
Political Geography:
Global Focus

10. Do Evolving Digital Trade Rules Create an Uneven Playing Field? Understanding Global Perspectives

Author:
Michael Pisa and Ugonma Nwankwo
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
This brief is based on a roundtable hosted by CGD as part of the Governing Data for Development project, which explores how governments can use data to support innovation, development, and inclusive growth while protecting citizens and communities against harm.
Topic:
Development, Economics, International Trade and Finance, and Digital Economy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

11. Are Current Models of Data Protection Fit for Purpose? Understanding the Consequences for Economic Development

Author:
Michael Pisa and Ugonma Nwankwo
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
This brief is based on a roundtable hosted by CGD as part of the Governing Data for Development project, which explores how governments can use data to support innovation, development, and inclusive growth while protecting citizens and communities against harm.
Topic:
Development, Economics, Privacy, and Models
Political Geography:
Global Focus

12. The Quality of Official Development Assistance

Author:
Ian Mitchell, Rachael Calleja, and Sam Hughes
Publication Date:
05-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
The Quality of Official Development Assistance (QuODA) measures and compares providers of official development assistance (ODA) on quantitative indicators that matter most to development effectiveness and quality. It aims to encourage improvements to the quality of ODA by highlighting and assessing providers’ performance. QuODA considers the agency-level measures and characteristics in areas that evidence suggest matters to development and where providers have made commitments. It is a dashboard of key indicators rather than a full assessment of how effective ODA has been, which depends on a wider set of actors and factors. This is the fifth edition of QuODA; it has been substantially revised since the last iteration. The indicators are based on the evidence of what matters to ODA impact and the principles agreed by 161 counties following a series of international meetings leading up to Busan in 2011 and taken forward by the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation.
Topic:
Development, International Cooperation, Humanitarian Intervention, and Development Assistance
Political Geography:
Global Focus

13. A Post-Brexit Trade Policy for Development and a More Integrated Africa

Author:
Kimberly Ann Elliott
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
The United Kingdom will confirm its departure from the European Union on 31st January 2020. As part of its independent trade policy, the government has committed to improve access to UK mar- kets for the poorest countries. This note sets out three ways it can do so: expanding duty-free market access while avoiding piecemeal trade agreements that undermine Africa’s own trade integration ef- forts; using an alternative framework for those trade agreements it does negotiate with developing countries; and supporting a “back-to-basics” multilateral negotiation at the World Trade Organiza- tion that could help to rebuild confidence in that institution and thus protect the interests of small and vulnerable countries. After a brief review of the background and context, it sets out specific pro- posals in each of these areas.
Topic:
Development, International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, European Union, and Brexit
Political Geography:
Africa, United Kingdom, and Europe

14. From Principles to Practice: Strengthening Accountability for Gender Equality in International Development

Author:
Megan O'Donnell
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Existing accountability mechanisms focused on global gender equality are largely retrospective in nature. Where mechanisms do probe at governments’ commitments to future progress, they often lack accompanying incentive structures (“carrots and sticks”) to encourage ambition. Countries re- port their progress implementing the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and the Beijing Platform for Action, participate in annual Commission on the Status of Women sessions, and touch on gender equality as part of voluntary national review reporting for the Sustainable Development Goals. Although these processes, among others, provide an opportu- nity for country reflection and for civil society engagement, they do not mandate that governments establish and adhere to forward-looking, specific commitments detailing how they aim to promote gender equality. The absence of future commitments makes it difficult for civil society actors to hold governments to account according to well-defined metrics. At the same time, governments and women’s rights advo- cates worldwide are increasingly discussing and adopting “feminist foreign policies” and “gender-re- sponsive budgeting.” There is a need to clearly define with robust and transparent metrics what these terms mean and how to hold countries who claim to be “feminist” and “gender-responsive” account- able for ambitious progress, while also encouraging other countries to increasingly prioritize gender equality.
Topic:
Development, Gender Issues, Inequality, Feminism, and Equality
Political Geography:
Global Focus

15. Mexico’s Financial Risks: Solving Pemex for a Solvent Mexico

Author:
Laura Alfaro, Augusto de la Torre, Guillermo Calvo, Roque Fernandez, Pablo Guidotti, Paulo Leme, Enrique G. Mendoza, Guillermo Perry, Carmen M. Reinhart, and Liliana Rojas-Suarez
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Mexico’s financial risks and the policies being adopted by the new administration cannot be ade- quately assessed without recognizing key features that characterize the following initial conditions:
Topic:
Development, International Trade and Finance, Governance, Finance, Economic Growth, and Risk
Political Geography:
North America and Mexico

16. Trends in Private Capital Flows to Low-Income Countries: Good and Not-So-Good News

Author:
Nancy Lee and Asad Sami
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Interest in mobilizing private finance for SDG investments is surging in a world of stagnating aid, limited fiscal space, and rising LIC debt. But is more reliance on private finance realistic for LICs? This paper explores the performance since the global financial crisis of one source of private finance for LICs: cross-border private capital inflows. Much of the evidence is encouraging, and some of it flies in the face of conventional wisdom. For LICs, private capital inflows are an important and growing source of finance. For the median LIC, private capital inflows are now as large as ODA as a share of GDP. And the FDI component—most of LIC inflows—has been stable and resilient throughout the post-crisis period. Importantly, inflows are not all captured by resource-rich LICs. In 2017, more than half of capital inflows to LICs went to non-resource-rich LICs. Increasingly, policies, not just resource endowments, shape LIC destinations for foreign capital. The relation between median capital inflows/GDP and median regulatory quality is significantly positive for non-resource-rich LICs. And sources of FDI are diversifying. In 2016, China’s stock of FDI in Africa was almost as large as that of the traditional investors: the US, UK, and France. But there is also not-so-good news. Median private capital inflow/GDP ratios are not positively correlated with median private domestic investment/GDP in LICs. Nor is there a significant relationship with median public investment/GDP. The apparent lack of complementarity between foreign and domestic investment may point to problems related to investment enclaves and/or the role of the state in LIC economies. As in other countries, non-FDI inflows to LICs are volatile and sensitive to global commodity prices and interest rates. We find no relation between median country per capita income levels and private inflows/GDP, highlighting the need for caution in IDA graduation policies.
Topic:
Development, Capital Flows, Interest Rates, Private Sector, and Capital
Political Geography:
Global Focus

17. Chinese Leadership and the Future of BRI: What Key Decisions Lie Ahead?

Author:
Brad Parks
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
It’s 2028. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has been underway for 15 years, but the initial enthusiasm and momentum behind BRI has vanished. Many of the governments that initially joined the initiative have publicly withdrawn or quietly wound down their participation. China’s staunchest allies remain engaged but even they have reservations about the wisdom of the initiative. They are saddled with unproductive public investment projects and struggling to service their debts. Domestic public sentiment towards China has soured, and they have come to view their participation in BRI as more of a political liability than an asset. But they worry about the consequences of alienating their most important patron and creditor. China has also assumed a defensive posture. Lacking the goodwill that it possessed at the beginning of BRI, it is now using inducements and threats to prevent its remaining clients from abandoning the initiative. Western donors and lenders watch from the sidelines with a sense of bemusement. They encouraged China to “multilateralize” BRI by establishing a common set of project appraisal standards, procurement guidelines, fiduciary controls, and social and environmental safeguards that other aid agencies and development banks could support. But Beijing chose to go it alone. It opted not to embrace the use of economic rate-of-return analysis to vet project proposals; resisted efforts to harmonize its environmental, social, and fiduciary safeguards with those used by aid agencies and development banks outside of China; and pushed back on the “Western” suggestion that it modernize its monitoring and evaluation practices. China bet that its fast and flexible approach to infrastructure finance would prove to be so compelling that traditional donors and lenders would eventually jump on the bandwagon and co-finance BRI projects. But it miscalculated. Its model was insufficiently attractive on its merits to enlist the participation and support of the other major players in the bilateral and multilateral development finance market. Nor was it sufficiently appealing to sustain elite and public support in partner countries.
Topic:
Development, International Trade and Finance, Infrastructure, Leadership, and Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)
Political Geography:
China and Asia

18. Five Takeaways on the Future of Humanitarian Reform

Author:
Jeremy Konyndyk
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
The world’s humanitarian aid architecture is growing outdated. Relief programs are most effective when they are integrated, locally owned, and demand driven. But humanitarian action in the 21st century remains constrained by a 20th-century aid model: siloed, supply driven, and centered on the individual mandates and sectors of major international aid agencies. This makes aid both less effective and less responsive than it could be. In a world where displacement is at the highest levels in generations, climate disasters are increasing, and humanitarian funding is beginning to level off, this disconnect is no longer tenable. But fixing it is not a simple matter—multiple rounds of humanitarian reform over the past 15 years have made progress but fallen short of fundamental change. Earlier this summer in Geneva, CGD convened two high-level private roundtables, one with leaders from humanitarian donor institutions and another with senior executives from major humanitarian aid agencies (both multilaterals and NGOs), to discuss how to make humanitarian aid more cohesive and user-centered. The meetings were part of a multiyear research initiative exploring how modernizing the humanitarian business model and humanitarian governance are integral to improving field-level humanitarian impact. CGD teed up the conversation with three emerging ideas from our research (you can see the presentation slides here). These ideas—the subjects of several forthcoming papers CGD is developing —explore ways of better aligning aid delivery around enhanced impact toward affected people’s priorities
Topic:
Development, Humanitarian Aid, International Cooperation, Reform, and Humanitarian Intervention
Political Geography:
Global Focus

19. Promoting Investment in Research for Development Outcomes: A Research Ventures Fund at the World Bank

Author:
Scott Morris
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
This note proposes a new Research Ventures Fund (RVF) at the World Bank to better prioritize R&D investments in support of development progress. The RVF would employ financing mechanisms that are consistent with research needs: significant scale and scope, patience, and tolerance for failure. Existing development-oriented research consortia like CGIAR would provide a promising start for RVF funding allocations. Donors to the IDA-19 replenishment should take the first step in securing funding for the new fund in 2019.
Topic:
Development, International Cooperation, Science and Technology, World Bank, Finance, Research, and Banking
Political Geography:
Global Focus

20. Building on Digital ID for Inclusive Services: Lessons from India

Author:
Alan Gelb and Anit Mukherjee
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
India has emerged as a leader in building on its biometric digital ID (Aadhaar) to reform service and program delivery. It moved quickly to consolidate the rollout of Aadhaar, and then to embed the unique Aadhaar number into program databases. A range of applications, including digital signature and payments, was then constructed on top of the Aadhaar foundation (the India Stack). Together with partners, the Center for Global Development is analyzing the effects of Aadhaar-based reforms. India offers lessons for many other countries as their focus evolves from rolling out an ID system towards using it to improve the efficiency and inclusivity of service delivery. Some programs using Aadhaar are federally administered but others are implemented at state level. It is already clear that some states and sectors are reforming better than others, generally because of better design of the digital reforms or stronger capacity to implement them. The three programs we discuss below high- light achievements as well as challenges that need to be overcome for greater efficiency and inclusion.
Topic:
Development, Governance, Identities, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
India and Asia