Existing studies imply that multilateral development assistance is more effective than bilateral assistance. However, multilateral assistance is increasingly constrained through earmarked funding where donors restrict the use of their funds. Such funding shifts decision-making power away from multilateral donors and increases transaction costs through more stringent monitoring requirements. We argue that the consequences of these constraints are negative for aid effectiveness. We test this argument by studying the effectiveness of the World Bank in increasing economic growth. Our research design combines novel data on the funding composition of growth-focused development projects between 1995 and 2014 with georeferenced data on their sub-national locations within 50x50km grid cells. Using difference-in-differences estimation, we assess whether local economic development, measured through the Gross Cell Product, increases in areas where core- and trust-funded projects were located in the previous year. We find that while growth-focused projects are generally effective, core-funded projects have a substantially greater impact than trust-funded projects. These findings imply that donors should consider allocating a greater share of their multilateral development assistance as unearmarked contributions if they want to safeguard the development impact of this assistance.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 14 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.