Search

Begin New Search Topic Reform Publishing Institution Center for Global Development Publication Year within 5 Years

1. Reforming the World Bank and MDBs to Meet Shared Global Challenges

Author:
Center for Global Development
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Last July, the Center for Global Development hosted a meeting with other think tanks to exchange perspectives on the multilateral development bank (MDB) system. We shared a common diagnosis that MDBs must more aggressively address the global challenges that defy national borders and threaten human life as we know it. By virtue of its global reach, financial firepower, and expertise, the World Bank is especially well positioned to be a major driver of progress on climate, pandemic preparedness natural resource conservation, and other global public goods. But it is not meeting its full potential. Participants at our meeting agreed to set out a shared “call to action” where we lay out ideas to evolve the World Bank. The central ideas are to make climate mitigation and adaptation a core component of the World Bank’s mandate; greatly expand its financing capacity; create more incentives for countries to invest in climate and health preparedness; and reform the organizational structure of the institution. Together these could help lay the foundation for a modern World Bank that is meeting the defining challenges of our time head on. Unless otherwise noted, we the undersigned support these ideas in our personal capacity. More information on related work underway in our organizations can be found at our respective websites.
Topic:
Sovereignty, Reform, Finance, and Banking
Political Geography:
Global Focus

2. A Package of Reforms for Financing Pandemic Preparedness and Response for the G7

Author:
Amanda Glassman and Eleni Smitham
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
COVID-19 has shown the detrimental consequences of insufficient and fragmented financing for outbreak preparedness, prevention, and response (PPR). As the world seeks to recover from the current COVID-19 pandemic, and to mitigate recovery needs for future health crises, more must be done to accelerate global efforts to ensure rapid, adequate funding and governance for global health security, which has been under-resourced and under-prioritized. The rationale for reforming and replenishing the global health architecture to prepare for the next pandemic is clear: to protect health, human lives, and economic well-being.[1] Without dedicated and accelerated investment—in scaled up surveillance, strengthened national health systems, enhanced research and development of medical countermeasures, and more—we will continue to face more frequent and more complex epidemics and pandemics in the years ahead, and be less prepared to stop them.[2] Without the capacity to surge financing to respond at-scale to infectious disease outbreaks, we risk a repeat of the devastation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Last July, the High-Level Independent Panel (HLIP) on Financing the Global Commons for Pandemic Preparedness and Response, mandated by the Italian Presidency of the G20, released the report A Global Deal for Our Pandemic Age, laying out policies and investments needed to reduce vulnerabilities to future pandemics.[3] Likewise, in 2021, the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response[4] described the shortcomings of the existing architecture and suggested similar policies for the future, including greater assessed contributions for the World Health Organization (WHO) and the need for dedicated financing to prevent and prepare for the next COVID-19 variant and pandemic risk. The Global Preparedness and Monitoring Board’s periodic reports went in this same direction[5] , as did earlier assessments following Ebola, SARS and MERS outbreaks though recommendations often went without implementation.[6] These reports and the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic itself have again made clear that existing mechanisms for financing pandemic preparedness and response are not fit-for-purpose, nor at the sufficient speed and scale needed to ensure global health security. Current financing for pandemic preparedness is small, fragmented, and concentrated in the health sector.[7] Different organizations across the global health and international financial institution architecture hold different comparative advantages in mobilizing and deploying monies and need to be fully financed to do what they are best suited to do. However, no institution (that is adequately funded, credible, and capable) is currently mandated to or accountable for ensuring pandemic preparedness, resulting in financing and accountability gaps, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where Global Health Security Action Plans too often go un-costed and unfunded.[8] Further, new regional organizations and groupings are leaders in their own development, and must be a central part of a new global health security architecture—the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC), Partnerships for African Vaccine Manufacturing (PAVM), Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Forum for the Progress and Development of South America (PROSUR), among others, are examples. Adequate reforms and robust replenishments of global health organizations new and old are needed to ensure stronger global health security and pandemic preparedness now and in the future. External funders should take a comprehensive view of the major global health initiatives and consider how a range of reforms, when combined, have the potential to respond more coherently and efficiently to the financing demands related to the on-going COVID-19 pandemic, other macro risks that affect public spending on health, and in the face of future health threats. There are reasons for optimism. Unlike the experience during previous pandemic threats, COVID-19 has finally seen the International Monetary Fund become more aware and vocal on the need to address both COVID-19 and future pandemic risks as “systemic risk(s) to the global economy, not just the development […] of a particular country.”[9] Finance, health and development policymakers are increasingly coming together in different fora and recognizing the need to invest across sectors and to connect the international financial architecture with health initiatives in ways that will deliver better outcomes.[10]
Topic:
Reform, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Global Focus

3. Understanding the Cost-Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccination in Nigeria

Author:
Helen Dempster, Jennifer Dew, Samuel Huckstep, Martina Castigliono, and Cassandra Zimmer
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration (GCM) calls on countries of destination to both expand regular migration pathways and take steps to increase the development impact of these pathways. Migration can have a positive impact on the economic development of migrants themselves, their families, their countries of origin, and their country of destination, if aspects such as integration, remittances, and skill transfers are prioritized. This paper, produced by the Center for Global Development (CGD) and the UK office of the International Organization for Migration (IOM), outlines lessons for the UK Government to implement if they are to increase the development potential of both their existing and new immigration pathways, particularly in the agriculture, nursing, and green technology sectors
Topic:
Development, Migration, Immigration, and Reform
Political Geography:
United Kingdom and Europe

4. Schooling for All: Feasible Strategies to Achieve Universal Education

Author:
Justin Sandefur
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
This report debates the case for specific public investments in education in low- and lower-middle-income countries, drawing on evidence of what has worked not just in small-scale experiments but historically and in large-scale national programs. Its messages are intended more for economic policymakers than educators, as they speak to what can be accomplished with fiscal instruments (money) and where trade-offs must be made. CGD does not take institutional positions. Each chapter is authored by a different set of CGD researchers (with some editorial steer), and each commentary is written by external contributors (who were promised space to disagree). This introduction tries to summarize the main arguments across all these contributions, noting points of consensus and ongoing debate.
Topic:
Development, Education, Reform, and Sustainability
Political Geography:
Global Focus

5. How Do Humanitarian Donors Make Decisions, and What Is the Scope for Change?

Author:
Rose Worden and Patrick Saez
Publication Date:
10-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
n this policy paper we review donor responses to a survey and interviews to probe the effects of the broader political and economic context in which donors operate, and identify internal constraints on humanitarian funding, planning, and making allocative decisions. We identify and highlight perceived and real constraints with which donors contend when making decisions on how to allocate limited resources. The way humanitarian donors fund is key to system-wide efficiency, effectiveness, and reforms in the humanitarian system. Donors face competing priorities when engaging in humanitarian response. They care about retaining control, must rely on limited information sources to inform decisions, and balance their approaches with other foreign policy objectives. Institutional legacies, trust, and visibility for their efforts also matter to donors. These factors have shaped how donors have approach their current commitments to Grand Bargain reforms as donors prepare to engage with the newest iteration of reform—the Grand Bargain 2.0.
Topic:
Humanitarian Aid, Reform, Institutions, and Donors
Political Geography:
Global Focus

6. 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

7. Examining the Impact of E-Procurement in Ukraine

Author:
Artur Kovalchuk, Charles Kenny, and Mallika Snyder
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
This paper examines the impact of Ukraine’s ambitious procurement reform on outcomes amongst a set of procurements that used competitive tendering. The ProZorro system placed all of the country’s government procurement online, introduced an auction approach as the default procurement method, and extended transparency. The reform was introduced with a dramatic increase in the proportion of government procurement that was conducted competitively. This paper examines the impact of ProZorro and reform on contracts that were procured competitively both prior to and after the introduction of the new system. It finds some evidence of impact of the new system on increasing the number of bidders, cost savings, and reduced contracting times.
Topic:
Governance, Reform, Procurement, and Contracts
Political Geography:
Europe, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe

8. Digital Governance: Is Krishna a Glimpse of the Future?

Author:
Arshi Aadil, Alan Gelb, Anurodh Giri, and Kyle Navis
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
The state of Andhra Pradesh is recognized as a leader in using technology to improve the delivery of public services, programs and subsidies. Many of its innovations were piloted in Krishna District, which has been visited by development agencies and delegations from many countries. This paper reports on research to better understand the functioning and effectiveness of its reforms to strengthen state capacity by digitalizing service delivery. Against the wider backdrop of the use of Aadhaar in India, it summarizes Andhra’s reforms, which go beyond those of most other jurisdictions in the measures taken to strengthen accountability, offer choice of service provider, and incorporate feedback loops using the vast amount of data generated by a real-time digital service system as well as beneficiary responses. It reports the results from surveys of beneficiaries who receive food rations through the Public Distribution System (PDS) and/or pensions, and on the response of landowners and tenant farmers to the digitization of land records, another important program. The results suggest strong support for the digitalization of these programs. The way in which the reforms have been implemented has indeed led to substantial improvements in delivery (as seen by beneficiaries) as well as, probably, significant fiscal savings. Is this case, then, a model for other Indian states and for other countries? Perhaps yes from a technology perspective; there are many lessons that apply to a wide range of programs and services and that others can usefully draw on. The picture is more complex from a political economy perspective, as suggested by some of the particular features of Andhra.
Topic:
Science and Technology, Governance, Reform, and Digitization
Political Geography:
Global Focus

9. Fuel Subsidy Reform and Green Taxes: Can Digital Technologies Improve State Capacity and Effectiveness?

Author:
Alan Gelb and Anit Mukherjee
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
Reforming inefficient and inequitable energy subsidies continues to be an important priority for policymakers as does instituting “green taxes” to reduce carbon emissions. Simply increasing energy prices will have adverse impact on poorer consumers, who may spend substantial budget shares on energy and energy-intensive products even though the rich typically appropriate more of the price subsidy. Equitable pricing reforms therefore need to be accompanied by programs to transfer compensation: depending on the situation, this can be targeted or universal. Successful reforms require measures to raise awareness-of the subsidies and the problems they cause, effective dissemination of the reform to the population, and rapid feedback loops to facilitate mid-course corrections. Digital technology, including for unique identification and payments, as well as general communications, can help build government capacity to undertake such reforms and respond to changes in fuel markets. The paper outlines the use of digital technology, drawing on four country cases. The technology is only a mechanism; it does not, in itself, create the political drive and constituency to push reform forward. However, it can be employed in a number of ways to increase the prospects for successful and sustainable reform.
Topic:
Climate Change, Energy Policy, Environment, Science and Technology, Reform, and Digitalization
Political Geography:
Africa, Middle East, India, and Latin America

10. 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