The World Bank in a post-pandemic age
Scaling up an ever-expanding agenda
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 11185078 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Ali Burak Güven (0000-0001-9335-2790, Birkbeck, University of London, autor de correspondencia) |
| Año | 2026 |
| Páginas | 1-20 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2026-02-17 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Third World Quarterly (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 0143-6597 • E-ISSN: 1360-2241 |
| Editorial | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/01436597.2026.2625299 |
| OpenAlex | W7130381019 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Referencias citadas | 52 |
This paper explores how the radical expansion of the World Bank’s loan portfolio since the COVID-19 pandemic impacted its policy vision. Building on a thematic analysis of International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and International Development Association (IDA) commitments in 2020–2024 and drawing insights from the Bank’s research output and ongoing bureaucratic restructuring, it finds that this resurgence in lending has not brought about a substantive change in the organisation’s policy priorities. Instead, the Bank scaled up its operations primarily by reinforcing its conventional normative concerns and redeploying some of its extant offer, while making only modest forays into relatively new areas consistent with its remit. I argue that this state of affairs can largely be explained by the peculiar way the Bank’s policy universe evolves – by layering new concerns over continuously reworked extant norms and instruments, leading to an ever-expanding, ever-revised agenda with considerable resilience. Crises in the past half-decade have not aggravated the otherwise formidable challenges the Bank encountered in a changing development landscape, enabling the organisation to rely on this default mode of adaptation without having to substantially recalibrate its policy outlook.
Scale (ratio · Scaling · Third world · COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts · Economic, Social, and Public Health Issues in Russia and Globally · Human Rights and Development
Hypocrisy Trap
Owning Development
World Development Report 2020
Goodbye Washington Consensus, Hello Washington Confusion? A Review of the World Bank's Economic Growth in the 1990s
Cooperating Through Competition
Covid‐19 and Policy Responses by International Organizations
World Development Report 2021
A DC State of Mind? A Review of the World Development Report 2021
The Aiib in the Liberal International Order
The evolution of China’s Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
Bridging the rationalist–constructivist divide
The ‘Southernisation’ of development
Controlling Capital
Paradigm and nexus
Global governance as patchwork
Global development governance in the ‘interregnum’
Whither the post-Washington Consensus? International financial institutions and development policy before and after the crisis
Organizational change ‘from within’
Explaining coherence in international regime complexes
China in Africa
Protecting Power
Post-pandemic transformations
The political economy of conditionality
Never let a pandemic go to waste
The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development meets the state
From crisis to geopolitical actor
Change and stability at the World Bank
State Capitalism and the New Global D/development Regime
International Organizations
Contesting the liberal script? The Aiib and the World Bank in development finance
The World Development Report 2022
Pleasing the Principal
Any alternative to the Wall Street Consensus? Comparing the infrastructure financing models of the US, the EU, and China
Orchestrating private investors for development
International organizations and organizational fields
Why international norms disappear sometimes
A partial conversion
Goodbye Washington Confusion, hello Wall Street Consensus
The Washington Consensus as transnational policy paradigm
The New Development Bank and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
Defending supremacy
The Wall Street Consensus
| Velocidad de citación | historical |
|---|---|
| Altamente citado | No |