World Bank
- Score:
- 85.7
- Position:
- 1 / 10 (Sovereign)
Overview
The World Bank is an international financial institution that provides loans and grants to the governments of low- and middle-income countries. It consists of the International Development Association (IDA) and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD). IDA provides concessional or interest-free loans and grants to governments of the poorest countries, while IBRD lends to governments of middle-income and creditworthy low-income countries. It was established in 1944 and was among the first multilateral development banks to become an IATI member in 2008.
Analysis
Overall, World Bank came top of all the sovereign portfolios assessed, scoring 85.7 out of 100. This marks a significant improvement from 2023 when it scored 65.4 and ranked 4th out of 9 institutions. In this edition of the Index, World Bank came top in the Core Information and Impact Management components, 4th for ESG and Accountability to Communities and 3rd for Financial Information. By contrast, in 2023 it did not place higher than 3rd in any component. World Bank gained format points throughout the assessment.
In the Core Information component, World Bank scored 26.63 out of 30, improving from 4th to 1st position between 2023 and 2025. It scored on all seventeen indicators in this component and scored 100 per cent on twelve of them. The only factors preventing it from achieving 100 per cent in this component were gaps in its disclosure policy, inconsistent disclosure of sub-national location and investment instrument on IATI, inconsistent reporting of total investment cost in the bulk download, and the absence of a last update date in the bulk download file.
World Bank also came joint first in the Impact Management component, scoring full points of 30 out of 30. In 2023, it ranked 2nd with a score of 25.33. It was one of two sovereign DFIs to score for all project-level questions in this component. It scored 100 per cent for all five indicators of the component. World Bank scored higher by improving the consistency of its results data on IATI and disclosing its approach to measuring impact attribution.
World Bank came 4th in the ESG and Accountability to Communities component, scoring 20.5 out of 30. At the project level, it continued to be one of two sovereign DFIs to score 100 per cent on the summary of E&S risks indicator. Its performance across the E&S project plans/assessments indicator and IAM global disclosure stayed the same as in 2023. However, it showed a slight improvement on the assurance of community disclosure indicator, due to more consistent disclosure of the relevant details.
In the Financial Information component, World Bank ranked 3rd with a score of 8.58 out of 10. It scored for all indicators in this component and showed progress in the currency of investment, and loan pricing information. It scored for the new climate finance methodology indicator and performed well on the new project-level climate finance indicator, only missing out for not consistently providing a detailed budget breakdown for climate finance.
Recommendations
- World Bank should review its disclosure policy according to current best practice and the DFI Transparency Tool.
- World Bank should update its bulk download file to include sub-national location data and ensure the investment instrument is consistently disclosed across all investments. It should also add total investment cost, disbursement, currency of investment and last update date as fields in the bulk download file.
- It should disclose a list of investment exemptions at the organisational level.
- World Bank should require clients to disclose the availability of the IAM to project-affected people where appropriate.
- It should publish all E&S documents for investments that have them, including environmental and social impact assessments and stakeholder engagement plans for higher risk projects.
- World Bank should specify which documentation was disclosed to project-affected people when required and indicate whether the existence of a Project Grievance Mechanism (PGM) and Independent Accountability Mechanism (IAM) was communicated to them, including the method of disclosure.
- It should consistently disclose a budget breakdown of climate finance at the investment level.