Comments on: Multilateral Development Banks: A system of Debt or Development?

By: Recommended resources on the World Bank and IMF 2021 - Fintechs Global

Recommended resources on the World Bank and IMF 2021 - Fintechs Global — Wed, 02 Feb 2022 17:50:36 +0000

[…] Multilateral Development Banks: A system of debt or development?Susan Engel & Adrian Bazbauers, Growing Economies, March 2021On this weblog the authors discover whether or not the MDBs work as a system and what position they play in selling each debt and improvement so here’s a brief abstract of a few of our key discovering on these three points. […]

LikeLike

By: Recommended resources on the World Bank and IMF 2021 - Bretton Woods Project

Recommended resources on the World Bank and IMF 2021 - Bretton Woods Project — Wed, 02 Feb 2022 17:30:40 +0000

[…] Multilateral Development Banks: A system of debt or development? Susan Engel & Adrian Bazbauers, Developing Economies, March 2021 In this blog the authors explore whether the MDBs work as a system and what role they play in promoting both debt and development so here is a short summary of some of our key finding on these three issues. […]

LikeLike

By: Çok taraflı kalkınma bankaları: Borçlanma sistemi mi, kalkınma sistemi mi? – Susan Engel ve Adrian Bazbauers | PolitikYol Haber Sitesi

Sat, 12 Jun 2021 21:30:12 +0000

[…] [developingeconomics.org’daki orijinalinden Pelin Tuştaş tarafından PolitikYol için çevrilmiştir.] […]

LikeLike

By: SusanEngel_uow

SusanEngel_uow — Wed, 14 Apr 2021 23:12:34 +0000

Thanks for the comment Matt. Getting away from donor-recipient relationships towards a partnership approach is a key part of mainstream donor agendas like the OECD’s Aid Effectiveness Agenda, so this would feature in their assessments of the Bank’s modus operandi. But the broader point is that both the new MBDs opted for a banking model (as you highlight) not a financial cooperative one, which is what both Keynes and White envisage but failed to created

LikeLike

By: Matt

Matt — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 23:53:31 +0000

I’m not sure this is a tenable point: [the AIIB] “opted for a donor-recipient blueprint, which is less development-friendly than the member-owned, financial cooperation agenda…”. The AIIB is primarily an investment lender, for projects, at near-market rates, to members of the bank. If you have a look at the ESG policies they are very much jointly devised, owned and delivered. Whether this makes them any more or less development-friendly than any other approach is something that some impact evaluation might shed light on, but I don’t think “donor-recipient” is going to feature in the assessments of the mode of assistance.

LikeLike