The Growing Development Potential of Other Official Flows

Development Co-operation Report 2014 Mobilising Resources for Sustainable Development © OECD 2014

PART I Chapter 4

The growing development potential of other official flows

by Alexander Klein, Cécile Sangaré and Giovanni Maria Semeraro, Development Co-operation Directorate, OECD

The development finance landscape has changed dramatically over the past two decades, with the relative importance of official development assistance (ODA) declining in comparison to other external finance available to many developing countries. Since 2008, “other official flows” (beyond ODA) – provided at close to market terms and/or with a commercial motive – from public bodies in OECD Development Assistance Committee member countries and multilateral institutions have made up, on average, one-third of all official flows to developing countries. This chapter outlines recent trends in these other official flows, their development potential and impact. International financial institutions are the largest providers of non-concessional development finance, representing almost two-thirds of their operations in 2012; more than 95% went to middle-income countries. Officially supported export credits, although commercially motivated, can also help finance large projects in developing countries. These flows deserve greater consideration in developing countries’ search for external financial resources.

59 I.4. THE GROWING DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF OTHER OFFICIAL FLOWS

Until recently, the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC) has centred its development co-operation policy recommendations on official development assistance (ODA), with little consideration of other official financial flows1 to developing countries, despite their potential developmental motivation and impact. Since 2008, other official flows have come to represent, on average, one-third of all official flows (finance extended to developing countries by public institutions from DAC members and multilateral institutions; see Figure 2.1, Chapter 2).

The development potential of other official financial flows has been rather overlooked.

Since the Monterrey Consensus on Financing for Development (see Glossary), discussions on external resources for development have increasingly paid attention to sources of finance other than official development assistance. These discussions have gained new momentum in the light of efforts to design a new set of Sustainable Development Goals to replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) when these expire in 2015. The broadening of the debate on development finance echoes the rapid evolution of the development financing landscape since the MDGs were agreed, and the fact that many countries, especially in the middle-income group, now have access to a much more diverse range of sources of finance – domestic and international, public and private. In addition, the global financial crisis has reduced the volume of private investment in developing countries, resulting in an increasing demand for risk-mitigation instruments to unlock private investment and increase access to finance (see Chapters 11 and 12). This chapter outlines how other official flows fit into this changing landscape, with a special focus on non-concessional finance from national and international development finance institutions (Box 4.1) to support private sector development. The chapter also gives an overview of officially supported export credits, which can also help finance large projects in key sectors of developing countries’ economies.

Other official flows are gaining importance in the development finance landscape Since the global financial crisis of 2008, non-concessional funding from national and international development finance institutions, as well as from other development co-operation actors focusing on private sector development, has played a critical role in catalysing private investment and helping to fill funding gaps, in particular those affecting infrastructure and trade. In addition, many development finance institutions are increasingly investing in investment funds in order to support private sector development and compensate for the shortfall of private equity in developing countries.

Official guarantees for development mobilised over USD 15 billion of private financing between 2009 and 2011.

60 DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION REPORT 2014 © OECD 2014 I.4. THE GROWING DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF OTHER OFFICIAL FLOWS

Box 4.1. What are “development finance institutions”? National and international development finance institutions are specialised development banks or subsidiaries set up to support private sector development in developing countries. They are usually majority owned by national governments and source their capital from national or international development funds or benefit from government guarantees. This ensures their creditworthiness, which enables them to raise large amounts of money on international capital markets and provide financing on very competitive terms. National or bilateral development finance institutions are either independent institutions, such as the Netherlands Development Finance Company (FMO), or part of larger bilateral development banks, such as the German Investment and Development Company (DEG), which is part of the German development bank KfW. They are both among the largest development finance institutions worldwide. Multilateral development finance institutions are the private sector arms of international financial institutions that have been established by more than one country, and hence are subject to international law. Their shareholders are generally national governments, but could also occasionally include other international or private institutions. These institutions finance projects in support of the private sector through mainly equity investments, long-term loans and guarantees. They usually have a greater financing capacity than bilateral development banks and also act as a forum for close co-operation among governments. The main international financial institutions with a private sector arm are the World Bank Group through the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the European Investment Bank (EIB), the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the African Development Bank (AfDB) and the Islamic Development Bank (IDB).

Guarantee schemes2 (whether developmentally or commercially motivated), have also played a key role in minimising the impact of the crisis on trade finance and the availability of liquidity, thus enabling the launching of development-relevant projects in developing countries. A recent DAC survey has highlighted that guarantees extended with a development motive mobilised over USD 15 billion of private sector flows to/in developing countries between 2009 and 2011 (Mirabile et al., 2013; see also Chapter 11). Many countries that are not members of the DAC have also been important providers of development co-operation for decades (see Box 2.2 in Chapter 2). These include the BRICS – Brazil, the Russian Federation, India, China and South Africa – as well as countries providing Islamic finance (explained in Chapter 11).3 Their involvement unlocks an attractive source of finance for many countries (for example, BRICS’ financing to developing countries reached over USD 4 billion in 2012). Over the past ten years, these development partners have grown rapidly in number; in some cases their levels of development co-operation now exceed those of individual DAC members. In particular, some of these countries are also helping to transform the development finance landscape through alternative co-operation strategies and modalities, such as South-South co-operation (see Chapter 3). The development community is also increasingly looking at official institutional investors as potential sources of long-term investment in developing countries (see Chapter 6). For instance, sovereign wealth funds are state-owned investment funds that invest globally in real and financial assets such as stocks, bonds, real estate or precious metals, or in alternative investments such as private equity fund or hedge funds. They are created either to ensure that a country’s resources are preserved for future generations or to stabilise government fiscal and/or foreign exchange revenues and their macroeconomic balance. Total assets managed by sovereign wealth funds have been growing rapidly over the past few years, reaching a record high of USD 6.1 trillion at the end of 2013.

DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION REPORT 2014 © OECD 2014 61 I.4. THE GROWING DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF OTHER OFFICIAL FLOWS

International financial institutions are by far the largest providers of other official flows International financial institutions can offer developing countries either concessional or non-concessional finance depending on the country’s income group classification (see Chapter 2). In 2012, both types of financing amounted to USD 70 billion (gross disbursements), slightly more than the previous year, following a substantial decrease from peak volumes reached in 2009 and 2010 (Figure 4.1). The World Bank Group4 and the regional development banks are, in terms of volume, the most prominent providers of multilateral development finance.

Figure 4.1. Share of non-concessional financing in international financial institutions’ total operations, 2000-12 Gross disbursements, USD billion, constant 2012 prices

IBRD IDB ADB IFC EBRD AfDB Other For reference: Concessional

0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Notes: IBRD: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development; IDB: Inter-American Development Bank; ADB: Asian Development Bank; IFC: International Finance Corporation; EBRD: European Bank for Reconstruction and Development; AfDB: African Development Bank. IBRD and the IFC are part of the World Bank Group. Source: OECD (2011a), “Detailed aid statistics: ODA Official development assistance: Disbursements”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00069-en; OECD (2011c), “Detailed aid statistics: Other official flows OOF”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00075-en; OECD (2012), “Creditor Reporting System: Aid activities”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00061-en. 1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933121335

International financial institutions’ concessional financing (i.e. ODA-like financing) – either grants or highly concessional loans – is mainly allocated to least developed and low-income countries, while their non-concessional operations (or other official flows) tend to target middle-income countries. These institutions use a wide range of financial options for their non-concessional operations, increasing their financial offer beyond traditional development finance to include instruments such as loans at close to market terms (including syndicated loans), mezzanine finance, equity investment, risk-mitigation instruments (e.g. guarantees), trade finance and shares in investment funds (all these terms are explained in Chapter 11 or the Glossary). A third type of finance offered by these providers is called “blended finance”. This combines a concessional and a non-concessional component to soften the terms and conditions of the final financial package (e.g. lower interest rate, longer tenor or pay-back period). Blended finance is gaining importance in some international financial institutions’ portfolios (e.g. the International Finance Corporation, International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and regional development banks such as the IDB).

62 DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION REPORT 2014 © OECD 2014 I.4. THE GROWING DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF OTHER OFFICIAL FLOWS

In 2012, non-concessional financing represented almost two-thirds of international financial institutions’ total financing, and more than 95% of it was extended to middle-income countries. Brazil, Mexico, India, Turkey and the People’s Republic of China benefited the most, receiving a total of USD 16.4 billion (Figure 4.2). IBRD and the ADB were the largest multilateral providers of non-concessional finance: USD 15.1 and 6.9 billion respectively in 2012 (Table 4.1). International financial institutions’ non-concessional finance was mostly (77%) allocated to infrastructure projects in the economic (e.g. transport, energy) and social (e.g. health, water supply and sanitation) sectors (Figure 4.3).

Figure 4.2. Geographical allocation of international financial institutions’ operations, 2012 Gross disbursements, USD billion

LDCs Other LICs LMICs UMICs

Top 10 recipients in 2012 % By income group 100 Turkey

Viet Nam 80 Bangladesh

Egypt 60 Ethiopia

Kenya 40 Ghana

Concessional operations India 20 Serbia

Tanzania 0 01234 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 USD billion % 100 Brazil

Mexico 80 India

Turkey 60 China

Indonesia 40 South Africa

Argentina

Non-concessional operations 20 Tunisia

Kazakhstan 0 0 1 2 3 4 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 USD billion

Notes: LDCs: least developed countries; Other LICs: other low-income countries; LMICs: lower middle-income countries and territories; UMICs: upper middle-income countries and territories. Source: OECD (2011a), “Detailed aid statistics: ODA Official development assistance: Disbursements”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00069-en; OECD (2011c), “Detailed aid statistics: Other official flows OOF”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00075-en; OECD (2012), “Creditor Reporting System: Aid activities”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00061-en.

DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION REPORT 2014 © OECD 2014 63 I.4. THE GROWING DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF OTHER OFFICIAL FLOWS

Table 4.1. Non-concessional financing by international financial institutions, 2012 Gross disbursements

International financial institutions Non-concessional financing, USD billion % of total financing

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/International Development Association 15.14 60 Asian Development Bank 6.90 79 Inter-American Development Bank 6.51 80 International Finance Corporation 6.41 100 African Development Bank 3.51 65 European Bank for Reconstruction and Development 3.34 100 Islamic Development Bank 1.30 82 European Investment Bank 0.76 11 OPEC Fund for Agricultural Development 0.45 60 International Fund for Agricultural Development 0.06 10 Caribbean Development Bank 0.04 36

Source: OECD (2011a), “Detailed aid statistics: ODA Official development assistance: Disbursements”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00069-en; OECD (2011c), “Detailed aid statistics: Other official flows OOF”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00075-en; OECD (2012), “Creditor Reporting System: Aid activities”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00061-en. 1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933133666

Figure 4.3. International financial institutions’ operations by sector, 2012 Commitments Concessional financing Non-concessional financing

Other, 2% Multi-sector including general environmental protection, 9% Humanitarian aid Other 2% Social infrastructure 9% Commodity aid 25% Production sectors Social and general 14% infrastructure programme 30% assistance 5% Production sectors 15%

Economic infrastructure 43% Economic infrastructure 47%

Source: OECD (2011b), “Detailed aid statistics: Official bilateral commitments by sector”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http:// dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00073-en; OECD (2012), “Creditor Reporting System: Aid activities”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http:// dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00061-en. 1 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/888933121373

In 2012, more than 95% of the international financial institutions’ non-concessional funding went to middle-income countries.

Development finance institutions help fill the gap between public aid and private investment Economic growth is critical for creating jobs and reducing poverty. Yet the private sector in developing countries is held back by poor access to finance, inadequate infrastructure, a poor investment climate, a large informal sector and a lack of skilled workers. A more enabling environment could allow the private sector to contribute to sustainable development in many ways, from economic growth to environmental sustainability. This is why today private sector growth is targeted across the development agenda (IFC, 2011).

64 DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION REPORT 2014 © OECD 2014 I.4. THE GROWING DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF OTHER OFFICIAL FLOWS

National and international development finance institutions can play a valuable role in stimulating growth directly by addressing employment, poverty reduction and inclusive growth, or indirectly by addressing important challenges such as climate change, food security and environmental sustainability (Box 4.2). Furthermore, support from development finance institutions can be a major ingredient of growth strategies, for instance by mobilising investment, promoting technology transfer, supporting labour market standards, promoting exports and encouraging savings (World Bank, 2008). These institutions can also give firms access to long-term loans as well as equity capital in situations where private financing is discouraged by high risk. The current gradual withdrawal of capital from developing countries, especially the rapidly growing economies, highlights the value of such long-term finance, which can help to stabilise an economy during economic downturns (World Bank, 2014; and see Chapter 6). In high-risk countries and sectors, equity investment or mezzanine finance can bring both development results and commercial viability. Furthermore, it offers the opportunity for these institutions to transfer knowledge in management

Box 4.2. Africa, energy and the European Development Finance Institutions National and international development finance have the potential to enforce compliance with environmental and social standards. They share common environmental and social guidelines, such as the IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability (IFC, 2012); the World Bank Environmental, Health and Safety Sector Guidelines1 and the conventions of the International Labour Organization. By following these guidelines, they target job quality and inclusiveness in business activity (IFC, 2011). For example, the association of European Development Finance Institutions (EDFI) is a group of 15 bilateral institutions operating in developing countries. They are mandated by their governments to finance and invest in profitable private sector enterprises in order to foster growth in sustainable business, help reduce poverty and, to a larger extent, contribute to achieving the MDGs by promoting economically, environmentally and socially sustainable development (EDFI, 2013). Although investing globally, Africa is a key priority for the EDFI, which in 2013 invested EUR 975 million in the African, Caribbean and Pacific and Middle East and North Africa (MENA) regions. The EDFI member institutions often join forces to finance larger projects, thus increasing their development impact and spreading risk. This is important because many energy infrastructure projects require economies of scale to be bankable, and because long-term funding is scarce, especially in Africa, where the country risks are often considered too high for commercial banks to provide funding. The European Financing Partners (EFP), established in 2004, is an example of such collaboration involving the European Investment Bank and 12 other development finance institutions. Together they promote private sector development in African, Caribbean and Pacific countries. An independent evaluation of EFP-financed energy projects in sub-Saharan Africa showed that the EDFI provided finance on terms unavailable from commercial lenders, as well as key advisory support (Dalberg, 2012). For example, in Kenya, the EFP invested in Olkaria III – an independent geothermal power producer – and Rabai Power, the most efficient thermal plant in Kenya. The EFP invested in these projects because they were less attractive to commercial lenders (e.g. high perception of risks). The resulting new electricity generation should help support hundreds of thousands of additional jobs and will lead to national cost savings in the tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars. For example, Olkaria III has allowed economic benefits from lower costs and higher reliability: the plant added 3.5% in national capacity, is currently supplying 6% of Kenya’s energy consumption and helped reduce load shedding2 in the country while reducing environmental impacts. The EDFI’s growing portfolios – from EUR 21.7 billion in 2010 to EUR 28.1 billion in 2013 – reflect the increasing importance of private sector support in the development agenda. But they also demonstrate the economically sustainable way these institutions work: the EDFI’s profits are retained and reinvested in new development projects, which contribute to increasing its portfolios over long-term profitable periods.

1. Available at www.ifc.org/ehsguidelines. 2. Voluntary blackouts to safeguard electricity consumption. Source: Adapted from Meyer, C. (2012), “EDFI: Africa and energy access – Financing impact”, CFI.Co online, 26 July, http://cfi.co/africa/2012/07/edfi- africa-and-energy-access-financing-impact.

DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION REPORT 2014 © OECD 2014 65 I.4. THE GROWING DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF OTHER OFFICIAL FLOWS

standards, accounting and corporate social responsibility.5 Finally, in addition to their own funds, development finance institutions help to bring in financing from other investors, who are often reassured by the image of viability that these institutions can lend to a firm, sector or country. Development finance institutions’ support to the private sector represents a significant share of capital flows to developing countries, reaching USD 18.6 billion in commitments in 2012, 68% of which were provided by international financial institutions. These operations represented one-third of international financial institutions’ non-concessional operations and were mainly allocated to lower and upper middle-income countries, with Turkey, India and Mexico being the top recipients (Figure 4.4). The share of their private sector operations has followed an upward trend since the global financial crisis. The IFC and EBRD were by far the largest multilateral providers in this domain. The main sectors that benefitted from these operations were economic infrastructure (60%) and production and services (35%).

Figure 4.4. International financial institutions’ non-concessional operations with the private sector, 2012 Top 10 recipients (gross disbursements) Sectoral allocation (commitments)

Turkey

India

Mexico

Ukraine Production sectors 35% South Africa Economic Brazil infrastructure Kazakhstan 60%

Serbia Social infrastructure 5% Mongolia

Morocco

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 USD billion Source: OECD (2011a), “Detailed aid statistics: ODA Official development assistance: Disbursements”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00069-en; OECD (2011c), “Detailed aid statistics: Other official flows OOF”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00075-en; OECD (2012), “Creditor Reporting System: Aid activities”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00061-en; OECD (2011b), “Detailed aid statistics: Official bilateral commitments by sector”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00073-en.

Officially supported export credits can be critical for financing large projects in developing countries Projects in developing countries may also be financed through export credits extended by official export credit agencies. Export credit agencies provide government-backed loans, guarantees and insurance to corporations working internationally. These credits are commercially motivated and have no explicit objective of promoting economic development and welfare in host economies. However, by mitigating risks for investors and enabling production and large infrastructure or energy projects (e.g. roads, dams or hydroelectric plants) to evolve, these flows play a critical role in providing access to capital in developing countries (Figure 4.5). For this reason, officially supported export credits deserve more attention in broader analyses of developing countries’ external finance – even if they are not official development finance.

66 DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION REPORT 2014 © OECD 2014 I.4. THE GROWING DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF OTHER OFFICIAL FLOWS

Figure 4.5. Which sectors benefit from export credits in developing countries? Commitments 2010-12

Production sectors, 42% Social infrastructure, 2%

Mineral resources and mining, 11%

Other production, 3% Industry, 28% Social infrastructure, 2% Other, 3%

Power generation and distribution, 18%

Transport and storage, 29% Communication, 6%

Economic infrastructure, 53%

Source: Export Credit Group statistics.

OECD member countries’ export credit agencies follow environmental and anti-corruption standards developed by the Working Party on Export Credits and Credit Guarantees,6 as well as the financing guidelines of the Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits which came into existence in 1978 and has been signed by most OECD countries.7 In order to avoid potential trade distortions (e.g. through the use of financial subsidies), the main purpose of the arrangement is to provide a framework for: 1) the orderly use of officially supported export credits (e.g. minimum interest rates, risk fees and maximum repayment terms); and 2) the orderly use of tied aid (see the Glossary). It also ensures fair competition, based on the price and quality of the exported goods. In recent years, export credit volumes have been decreasing to developing countries, from USD 75 billion in 2010 to USD 55 billion in 2012 (in terms of gross disbursements), according to DAC statistics. During this period, Japan, followed by Germany, Canada, the United States and France, were the main DAC providers of export credit financing to developing countries (Figure 4.6). Among developing countries, middle-income countries were the main beneficiaries, with Turkey, India, Mexico, Brazil and China being the largest recipients in 2011 and 2012 (receiving a total of USD 31 billion; Figure 4.7).

Figure 4.6. Main DAC providers of export credit financing, 2010-12 Gross disbursements

Japan Germany Canada United States France Others 29.7% 21.8% 16.0% 15.7% 4.3% 12.5%

0102030405060708090100 %

Notes: DAC and Export Credit Group (ECG) statistics on officially supported export credits differ to some extent and for some countries. While DAC statistics cover disbursements on operations with a maturity of one year and above, the ECG data represent export credit commitments with a maturity of two years and above. Source: DAC aggregate geographical tables.

Figure 4.7. Top 10 beneficiaries of export credits, 2011 and 2012 USD billion, current prices 2011 gross disbursements 2012 gross disbursements Turkey India

India Brazil

Indonesia Mexico

Mexico China

Brazil Colombia

China Algeria

Malaysia Egypt

Panama Turkey

Viet Nam Viet Nam

Angola Venezuela

02468 02468

Key recommendations ● Give greater attention to other official flows in countries’ development co-operation strategies as a relevant alternative and complement to ODA. ● Prioritise the effective use of other official flows in emerging economies to free up ODA for the poorest countries. ● Do more to exploit the potential of other official flows for engaging the private sector for development, in particular: ❖ Development finance institutions’ non-concessional financing, while avoiding market distortions in developing countries. ❖ Official funds extended with a clear commercial motive and close to or at market conditions, such as export credits, for financing productive sectors and large infrastructure projects.

Notes 1. Other official flows are defined as transactions by the official sector which do not meet the conditions for eligibility as ODA, either because they are not primarily aimed at development or because they are not sufficiently concessional. Concessional finance refers to loans provided at lower than market rates for developing countries, for longer terms and with conditions which allow grace periods for payments. For more details see the Glossary. 2. Guarantees act as a type of “insurance policy” against the risks of non-payment, facilitating financial flows to developing countries and high-risk sectors. 3. A set of very specific financial instruments used in the Islamic world. 4. Comprising the International Development Association (IDA), the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Finance Corporation (IFC). 5. With equity investments development finance institutions are usually provided a seat on the board of directors. 6. Also known as the Export Credit Group (ECG). All OECD countries, with the exception of Chile and Iceland, are members of this OECD body. For more information, see www.oecd.org/tad/xcred/ecg.htm. 7. Available at: www.oecd.org/tad/xcred/theexportcreditsarrangementtext.htm.

References Dalberg (2012), EDFI Joint Evaluation on EFP Energy Infrastructure Projects, Dalberg Global Development Advisers, Washington, DC, www.edfi.be/news/news/28-edfi-joint-evaluation-on-efp-energy-infrastructure-projects.html. EDFI (2013), “Welcome to EDFI: The Association of European Development Finance Institutions”, European Development Finance Institutions, www.edfi.be (accessed 8 April 2014). IFC (2012), IFC Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability, International Finance Corporation, Washington, DC. IFC (2011), IFI and Development Through the Private Sector, International Finance Corporation, Washington, DC. Meyer, C. (2012), “EDFI: Africa and energy access – Financing impact”, CFI.Co online, 26 July, http://cfi.co/africa/2012/ 07/edfi-africa-and-energy-access-financing-impact. Mirabile, M., J. Benn and C. Sangaré (2013), “Guarantees for development”, OECD Development Co-operation Working Papers, No. 11, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k407lx5b8f8-en. OECD (2014), Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits,OECD,Paris,www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/ publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?doclanguage=en&cote=tad/pg(2014)1. OECD (2012), “Creditor Reporting System: Aid activities”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00061-en. OECD (2011a), “Detailed aid statistics: ODA Official development assistance: Disbursements”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00069-en. OECD (2011b), “Detailed aid statistics: Official bilateral commitments by sector”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00073-en. OECD (2011c), “Detailed aid statistics: Other official flows OOF”, OECD International Development Statistics (database), http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/data-00075-en. World Bank (2014), Global Economic Prospects: Coping with Policy Normalization in High-Income Countries,The World Bank, Washington, DC. World Bank (2013), Financing for Development Post-2015, The World Bank, Washington, DC. World Bank (2008), The Growth Report: Strategies for Sustained Growth and Inclusive Development, Commission on Growth and Development, The World Bank, Washington, DC.

DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION REPORT 2014 © OECD 2014 69 From: Development Co-operation Report 2014 Mobilising Resources for Sustainable Development

Access the complete publication at: https://doi.org/10.1787/dcr-2014-en

Please cite this chapter as:

OECD (2014), “The growing development potential of other official flows”, in Development Co-operation Report 2014: Mobilising Resources for Sustainable Development, OECD Publishing, Paris.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/dcr-2014-8-en

This work is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of OECD member countries.

This document and any map included herein are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area.

You can copy, download or print OECD content for your own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and multimedia products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable acknowledgment of OECD as source and copyright owner is given. All requests for public or commercial use and translation rights should be submitted to [email protected]. Requests for permission to photocopy portions of this material for public or commercial use shall be addressed directly to the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) at [email protected] or the Centre français d’exploitation du droit de copie (CFC) at [email protected].