Rethinking Development Finance in a Geoeconomic World Order
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The recent annual IMF-World Bank Spring Meetings convened the world's leading economists and policymakers in Washington, D.C. What was once regarded as a vital forum to discuss global economic projections and future planning, was overcome by a profound sense of trepidation this year.
As of 2025, the annual financing gap for achieving the sustainable development goals (SDGs) stands at $4.2 trillion. But amid escalating trade wars, adversarial geoeconomics, and market uncertainty, one crucial argument remains overlooked: the path forward demands confronting the root causes of a broken system.
Under the theme "Jobs, the path to prosperity," the gathering in Washington appeared to revert back to outdated macroeconomic models rather than addressing the structural challenges facing low-to-middle income countries (LMICs).
In Africa alone, external debt levels increased by a staggering 240 percent between 2008-2022. By 2023, the debt burdens of LMICs reached an unprecedented $8.8 trillion, forcing more than 12 states to default on payments while plunging 30 of the world's poorest countries into "debt distress."
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) building sign is viewed in Washington, D.C.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) building sign is viewed in Washington, D.C.
KAREN BLEIER/AFP via Getty Images
Recommendations from leading international financial institutions (IFIs) must go beyond the fiscal levers of austerity and deregulation if we are to pursue the "path to prosperity." Especially when considering that over 3.3 billion people (approximately 40 percent of the global population) live in countries where more is spent on interest payments than on basic services like education or health care.
Over the past three months, the global economic order has faced a moment of reckoning. With a new series of market shocks and tariffs, LMICs have yet again, and through no fault of their own, been left to foot the bill.
From a deepening debt crisis to building economic resilience, the existing financial architecture has failed developing economies.
Development Finance in a Geoeconomic World Order
As the world continues to grapple with the impact of slashed overseas development budgets, the simple truth is that aid alone will not suffice. Even if wealthier states commit to the 0.7 percent of gross national income (GNI) target toward official development assistance (ODA), we will still need to break the vicious debt-cycle and create breathing room for longer-term investments that tackle development challenges. By lowering the cost of borrowing, emerging economies can confront core issues like reducing inequality while enhancing the quality of basic services like education, energy, and health care.
Multilateral development banks (MDBs) will also need to dramatically scale up their financial capacity. By implementing an improved G20 Capital Adequacy Framework, deploying blended capital instruments, and reallocating $100 billion from G20 countries' IMF Special Drawing Rights (SDRs)—MDBs could mobilize at least $300 billion annually in affordable financing by 2030.
The entire global financial ecosystem must also deliver on the landmark $100 billion pledge to provide the poorest countries with concessional loans under The International Development Association (IDA).
The list goes on when it comes to possible solutions, from debt swaps to emergency pause clauses and concessional loans. There is need to adapt metrics and analytical tools to better reflect the structural hurdles of developing countries but also their potential.
Ultimately, the challenge lies in overcoming institutional rigidity to mobilize the vast potential of the multilateral system to bridge crucial financing gaps. As evidenced by the outcomes of the recent ECOSOC Forum on Financing for Development in April, systemic reform will be the defining factor.
The Path Forward: Translating Commitments to Action
This year, the IMF's latest World Economic Outlook delivered a sobering assessment, where global growth projections dropped by 0.5 percentage points. As world leaders contend with a new geoeconomic order, countries will need to compete not only for territory or political influence but for market access and financial stability. And so, the world simply can no longer afford to lose sight of development finance, especially at a time when it could not be more vital.
In June, world leaders and financial institutions will have an opportunity to translate commitments into decisive action at the landmark 4th International Conference on Financing for Development in Sevilla, Spain. Preparatory Committee Sessions in New York are already laying the groundwork for what could be a renewed financing framework for sustainable development.
This conference is not about politicizing aid and development, but rather about recognizing what is at stake for everyone. History has repeatedly shown us how extreme poverty and deepening inequalities in lower-income countries can escalate into full blown security crises.
While leaders navigate a changing world order, confronting the development crisis must go beyond rhetoric and address the structural drivers of global inequality. Innovative solutions go far beyond principles of effective multilateralism, they are a necessity for its evolution and more importantly—its survival.
María Fernanda Espinosa, former president of the 73rd U.N. General Assembly and Ecuador's minister of foreign affairs and national defense, now leads GWL Voices as executive director. With over 30 years in academia and international diplomacy, Espinosa is a recognized authority on global governance.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Business News
32 minutes ago
- Time Business News
The Vision of Javier Pascuet, a Smart City Professional at IFGICT
In the complex and rapidly evolving world of urban development, a new kind of expert is emerging: the smart city professional. This role demands a unique combination of technical knowledge, strategic vision, and a deep understanding of governance and public administration. Javier Pascuet IFGICT, with his extensive background in tourism, digital transformation, and public service, is a quintessential example of this modern professional. He doesn't just theorize about technology; he leverages his experience as a former Director of Tourism in prominent hubs like Palma and Calvià to implement real-world solutions that improve the lives of both residents and visitors. Javier's work goes beyond the typical tech consultant. As a smart city professional, he has been responsible for steering major initiatives like Smart Calvià, a project that seamlessly integrated technology to enhance urban services and tourism experiences. This hands-on experience in leading and managing projects from a public sector perspective is invaluable. He understands the critical need to align digital initiatives with the social, economic, and environmental goals of a destination, a core tenet of effective smart city development. The work of a smart city professional is most impactful when it adheres to globally recognized standards and best practices. This is where the International Federation of Global and Green ICT (IFGICT) plays a crucial role. IFGICT provides the foundational certifications and frameworks that ensure digital transformation efforts are not only innovative but also sustainable, ethical, and secure. Javier's approach—bridging Mediterranean identity with digital innovation to create inclusive and future-oriented tourism strategies—is a practical demonstration of the principles that IFGICT champions. The Federation's focus on areas like Green ICT, sustainable development goals (SDGs), and smart city governance provides a roadmap for professionals like Javier. His success in projects like Smart Calvià serves as a powerful case study, showcasing how a professional with the right mix of experience and strategic alignment can bring the theoretical standards of IFGICT to life. For a smart city professional, a certification from IFGICT is more than a credential; it's a validation that their work is in sync with the global movement towards a more responsible and efficient use of technology. The very essence of a smart city is its interconnectedness, and the same principle applies to the professionals who build them. The work of IFGICT in fostering a global community of experts is vital. It creates a space for practitioners like Javier Pascuet ifgict to share their on-the-ground insights and challenges, enriching the collective knowledge base. In turn, the certifications and training programs offered by IFGICT—such as the Smart City Professional (SCP) certification—equip the next generation of leaders with the structured knowledge they need to succeed. Javier's career is a testament to the power of combining a deep understanding of tourism and public administration with a strategic vision for digital transformation. By helping destinations and businesses innovate through technology, he is not just improving efficiency; he is helping to craft the next chapter of tourism—one that is intelligent, responsible, and built for the future. His work serves as a practical example of the very concepts and standards that organizations like IFGICT are working to establish on a global scale, solidifying his role as a leading smart city professional. TIME BUSINESS NEWS
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
California Advances Redistricting Plan in Texas Counter-Punch
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The California state legislature has passed a redistricting plan that favors Democrats on the same day that Texas looks to pass its own redistricting plan that would favor Republicans as the two parties keep an eye on the 2026 midterm elections and control of Congress. The redistricting plan, pushed by California Governor Gavin Newsom to counter what he called President Donald Trump's efforts to "rig" the next elections, adds five seats that favor Democrats in a direct counterweight to the five seats the Republicans could gain in Texas. The State Assembly passed the new map by 57 to 20, and the State Senate again approved the new map just hours later on a party-line vote with 30 to 8. "Open your eyes to what is going on in the United States of America in 2025," Newsom said at a press conference following the vote. "That's what this is about. We're responding [to] what occured in Texas. We're neutralizing what occurred, and we're giving the American people a fair chance, because when all things are equal, and we're all playing by the same rules, there's no question that the Republican party will be the minority party in the House of Representatives next year." The new map still requires California voters to approve it, which will occur at a special election. Newsom's plan has faced fierce backlash from Republicans in California, including former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who will campaign against the new map in what is set to be a bitter fight in the state. This is a breaking news story. Updates will follow.
Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
Trump Strikes on Mexico Cartels Could Backfire Disastrously, Experts Warn
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Experts on U.S.-Mexico relations have told Newsweek that reported plans by the Trump administration for potential military operations against cartels in Mexico would be condemned as an act of aggression that could have disastrous unintended consequences — while also "fundamentally misdiagnosing" how the groups operate. The reported plans, first revealed by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein, are set to be ready for mid-September, and would involve action on Mexican soil at the direction of President Donald Trump. "Absent Mexican consent, any military action in Mexico will be condemned, I believe justifiably, as an act of aggression in violation of the most basic provision of the UN Charter and customary international law," Geoffrey Corn, director of the Center for Military Law and Policy at Texas Tech School of Law, told Newsweek. "The U.S. will undoubtedly assert it is acting pursuant to the inherent right of self-defense. But that right is only applicable in response to an actual or imminent armed attack, not on activities of a non-state group that cause harm to the nation, which I believe is the case." The increased enforcement action would come after the Trump administration classified select cartels and transnational criminal gangs as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) in February. The president has long argued that the U.S. needed to be firmer in how it dealt with the groups, widely seen as the driving force feeding the cross-border drug trade. Sending a Message A helicopter patrols under "Operation Mirror" to secure the border in coordination with the U.S. Border Patrol in Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua State, Mexico on August 20, 2025. A helicopter patrols under "Operation Mirror" to secure the border in coordination with the U.S. Border Patrol in Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua State, Mexico on August 20, 2025. HERIKA MARTINEZ/AFP via Getty Images When Newsweek asked the Department of Defense about the report, Sean Parnell, the Pentagon's spokesperson, reaffirmed the president's FTO designation and the belief that the groups are a "direct threat" to national security. "These cartels have engaged in historic violence and terror throughout our Hemisphere—and around the globe-- that has destabilized economies and internal security of countries but also flooded the United States with deadly drugs, violent criminals, and vicious gangs," Parnell said. Klippenstein's report is not the first to detail potential military action, however, with the U.S. moving personnel into the seas around Mexico and Latin America in recent weeks. "On the practical level, we have to clarify what 'military action' means. One could think of drone strikes on infrastructure, but fentanyl production and trafficking in Mexico is highly fragmented—small networks, labs inside houses in cities like Culiacán. Drone strikes there would be complicated and dangerous," David Mora, senior analyst for Mexico at International Crisis Group, told Newsweek Thursday. "If it were instead a deployment of U.S. troops to capture or eliminate a criminal leader, Trump might sell it as a victory. It would sound good and grab headlines, but it would be an empty victory. History shows that this strategy does not solve drug trafficking or organized crime. "On the contrary, it increases violence. Even the Department of Justice and the DEA have admitted this." This aerial view shows the MexicoU.S. border wall extending into the Pacific Ocean at Playas de Tijuana, Baja California state, Mexico on August 12, 2025. This aerial view shows the MexicoU.S. border wall extending into the Pacific Ocean at Playas de Tijuana, Baja California state, Mexico on August 12, 2025. GUILLERMO ARIAS/AFP via Getty Images Military Action Could Backfire on the Border When the FTO designation was first signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, policy experts raised concerns about the unintended consequences the move could have, particularly around immigration. While Trump has all but shut down the southern border with Mexico, one critic said branding cartels as terrorist organizations could lead to stronger claims for asylum – a concern echoed by Cecilia Farfán-Méndez, the head of the North American Observatory at Global Initiative Against Transational Organized Crime. "It is mutually exclusive from the border and migration objectives the administration has. Evidence shows that violence drives internal displacement," Farfán-Méndez told Newsweek. "U.S. military action in Mexico, and potential responses by criminal groups in Mexico, could generate displacement of communities. "As with other episodes of violence and displacement, it is not unthinkable these communities migrate to the border and seek asylum in the US. This prevents the orderly migration process the Trump administration has sought." All three experts Newsweek spoke with raised concerns about the viability and constitutionality of making such moves, when cartels have not necessarily carried out a coordinated attack on the U.S. that could be defined as military action that would require like-for-like retaliation. Farfán-Méndez said she believed there was a misdiagnosis on the part of the White House regarding how criminal gangs operate, explaining that the drug trade was not "three men hiding in the Sierra Madre that you can target and eliminate", and that there were actors working in concert on both sides of the border. U.S. Sentencing Commission data for 2024 backed that up, showing 83.5 percent of those sentenced for fentanyl trafficking within the U.S. were American citizens, rather than foreign nationals. Sheinbaum Could Be Political Victim Mexico's President Claudia Sheinbaum is shown during a press conference on June 6, 2025. Mexico's President Claudia Sheinbaum is shown during a press conference on June 6, 2025. The experts also questioned how operations could affect the relationship between the U.S. and its southern neighbor, where President Claudia Sheinbaum has been clear publicly in her efforts to stem the flow of immigrants and drugs across the border while managing her relationship with Washington over other issues like trade. "Mexico has always had less leverage," Mora said. "If during Sheinbaum's government there were any kind of unilateral U.S. action, it would be extremely politically sensitive. In Mexico, any unilateral action is equal to invasion. "Imagine the slogan: being the president under whom the United States invaded Mexico again. Politically, it would be almost the end for her." For the Trump administration, which came into office in January promising strong border security and the end of fentanyl trafficking into the U.S., the likelihood of stronger actions on cartels appears clear, if the methods and strategy are less so. Parnell told Newsweek that taking action against cartels, at the president's directive, required a "whole-of-government effort and thorough coordination with regional partners" to eliminate the abilities of cartels to "threaten the territory, safety, and security" of the U.S. Corn said any use of military force against the cartels would ultimately do more harm than good. "I think this also is consistent with a trend we are seeing: when you think your best tool is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a nail," the lawyer said. "This administration seems determined to expand the use of military power for all sorts of what it designates as 'emergencies.' But this is fundamentally not a problem amenable to military attack."
