AfDB – non-sovereign
- Score:
- 56.2
- Position:
- 3 / 22 (Non-sovereign)
Overview
The African Development Bank (AfDB) promotes regional cooperation and unity across the African region. Its non-sovereign portfolio provides non-concessional and concessional loans, equity investments, loan guarantees, and technical assistance to lower and middle-income governments and the private sector. AfDB became an IATI member in 2011 and started publishing IATI data in June 2013. AfDB was established in 1964.
Analysis
Overall, AfDB’s non-sovereign portfolio ranked 3rd out of the 22 non-sovereign portfolios assessed, scoring 56.2 out of 100. It improved from a score of 51.4 in 2023 but dropped one ranking from its position as 2nd. While it performed well in the Core Information and Impact Management components, ranking 2nd and 1st, respectively, its score was lowered by its performance in the other components.
AfDB’s non-sovereign portfolio came 2nd in the Core Information component, with 15.58 out of 20, moving down one ranking from its position as 1st in 2023. AfDB scored for sixteen of the seventeen indicators, only failing to score for domicile. It scored 100 per cent for ten of these indicators because it publishes to IATI and provides data in a bulk export file. It failed to score for sub-indicators on sub-sector, total investment cost, disbursement, client contact, disclosure date and last update date.
AfDB’s non-sovereign portfolio kept its top position from 2023 for the Impact Management component, scoring 21 out of 25. Because of its progress on disclosing which impact standards it aligns to, it scored 100 per cent for organisational-level indicators in this component. As well as improved scores since 2023 for project-level additionality statements, it was one of only two non-sovereign portfolios to score 100 per cent for activity indicators/metrics. The only indicator it continued to not score for was results, due to its inconsistent disclosure of baseline and actual/current data.
In the ESG and Accountability to Communities component, AfDB ranked joint 5th with a score of 16 out of 25, moving up from its position as 7th in 2023. Because of having a free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) policy, it now scored 100 per cent for all organisational-level indicators. At the project-level, however, due to inconsistent disclosure, AfDB did not score for any indicators other than disclosure of the independent accountability mechanism (IAM) on project webpages. This is a setback from 2023 where it scored points for disclosing the minimum E&S documentation for the risk categorisation as well as disclosure of client shareholders. This time neither passed the sample threshold to score because of inconsistent disclosure.
AfDB ranked 13th in the Financial Information component, with a score of 2.33 out of 15. This is a drop from its position as joint 8th in 2023. One improvement was new basic co-financing disclosure at the project level. AfDB also scored on the new climate finance methodology indicator and continued to score on the financial reports/statements indicator. However, it still did not score on repeat investment, currency of investment, concessionality, mobilisation, and instrument-specific disclosure. AfDB did not score on any of the new project-level climate finance indicators.
In the Financial Intermediary (FI) Sub-Investments component, AfDB’s non-sovereign portfolio came joint 8th with a score of 1.25 out of 10. In 2023, it came 6th. Its performance stayed the same across all indicators in this component.
Recommendations
- AfDB should consistently publish Core Information data including domicile, sub-sector, total investment cost, disbursement, client contact, disclosure date and last update date.
- It should consistently disclose baseline and actual/current value data for identified indicators.
- AfDB should consistently disclose summary of E&S risks, E&S project plans/assessments, and assurance of community disclosure where required. It should also consistently disclose the shareholders of client companies as well as a beneficial ownership statement.
- In the Financial Information component, AfDB should disclose several project-level indicators including repeat investment, currency of investment, detailed co-financing data, concessionality, mobilisation, and instrument-specific disclosure.
- AfDB should systematically disclose whether investments include climate finance, amounts split by mitigation and adaptation, as well as a rationale for why climate finance has been counted.
- AfDB should create a policy for FI sub-investment disclosure and then disclose sub-investments in line with Publish What You Fund’s DFI Transparency Tool.