Log in to star items.
- Convenors:
-
Abraham Oluwapelumi Adeniran
(Durban University of Technology)
Abiodun Ogundele (Afe Babalola University)
Dasauki Musa (University of South Africa (UNISA))
Olamide Adeniran (Ecoscrib Innovations)
Send message to Convenors
- Format:
- Paper panel
- Stream:
- Economics of development: Finance, trade and livelihoods
- Location:
- L1.20
- Sessions:
- Thursday 9 July, -
Time zone: Europe/Dublin
Short Abstract
The panel assesses how new lenders and alliances reshape policy space, standards and debt terms. Specifically we will be focusing on negotiation strategies, transparency, safeguards and equity. The aim is to propose reforms for fairer outcomes and accountable finance.
Description
International aid and finance has evolved into a multipolar arena, where recipient governments must navigate a diverse array of funding sources. These include established traditional donors and multilateral development banks, alongside newer actors such as China, Gulf states, regional investment funds, and private sector financiers. This complexity requires careful consideration of how to integrate competing offers while safeguarding national interests.
This panel explores the ways in which loan conditionalities, transparency requirements, environmental and social governance standards,as well as debt repayment terms constrain or expand policy autonomy. The panel will also look into how it affect socioeconomic outcomes.
We encourage submissions of sector-specific or country-focused studies that analyze negotiation strategies, co-financing mechanisms, and the cascading impacts on initiatives in areas like infrastructure development, public health, digital public goods, and climate adaptation finance.
Papers that leverage empirical data from budgets, legal agreements, stakeholder interviews, or process-tracing methodologies are particularly welcome. We also invite proposals that advance practical solutions for enhancing transparency, aligning safeguards across donors, and facilitating equitable debt restructuring processes, with a strong emphasis on prioritizing domestic agendas.
The panel seeks to articulate a coherent equity framework for this shifting global order, ensuring that transformations in aid and finance promote inclusive and sustainable results for all stakeholders.
Accepted papers
Session 1 Thursday 9 July, 2026, -Paper short abstract
Resource-backed borrowing ties sovereign finance to future oil revenues. Using African oil exporters, this study shows that RBL exposure amplifies pro-cyclical fiscal adjustment during price shocks and weakens policy space, underscoring the need for stronger disclosure and transparency reforms.
Paper long abstract
Resource-backed borrowing links sovereign finance to future commodity revenues through export prepayment, repayment-in-kind, and collateral/escrow arrangements. This paper examines how these structures reshape policy space in oil-dependent African borrowers, focusing on Nigeria, Angola, Chad, and the Republic of Congo. Building on the World Bank’s publicly identified set of 30 resource-backed loans in Sub-Saharan Africa (2004–2018), we extend the inventory with more recent publicly reported crude-backed facilities and restructuring episodes, including Nigeria’s large crude-oil prepayment facility and Angola’s renegotiated repayment mechanics.
Empirically, we combine (i) a sector/country mapping of RBL structures (repayment channel, tenor, offtaker/lender type) with (ii) an event-study around negative oil-price shocks using IMF commodity prices and export/fiscal series (UN Comtrade; IMF WEO/IFS). We test whether RBL reliance is associated with sharper pro-cyclical adjustment, measured by changes in capital spending, social spending proxies, arrears, and reserve drawdowns relative to non-RBL peers. We then process-trace how opacity and earmarked repayment channels alter bargaining dynamics during downturns and restructurings. The paper concludes with actionable reforms: minimum disclosure of repayment formulas/escrow balances, stress-testing clauses, and harmonized transparency standards for creditor coordination.
Paper short abstract
Using WTO Trade Policy Review reports (2005–2025), I quantify diplomatic-linguistic hedging in Sub-Saharan African trade discourse (modals, uncertainty, conditionals). I compare to matched peers and link hedging to restrictions, reform delays, and discretionary policy space.
Paper long abstract
Trade outcomes depend not only on tariffs and market size but on how states frame commitments. This paper measures “diplomatic hedging” in Sub-Saharan Africa’s trade policy narratives using WTO Trade Policy Review (TPR) documents. We compile a corpus of government and Secretariat reports for selected Sub-Saharan African members (2005–2025) and use computational text analysis to quantify hedging (modal verbs, uncertainty markers, conditional and aspirational phrasing). We benchmark results against matched non-African developing countries and examine within-country change around shocks (commodity price collapses, elections, IMF programs). We then relate hedging intensity to policy signals in TPRs—new trade restrictions, delayed reforms, and discretion-based measures—controlling for income, trade openness, and institutional capacity. We validate the hedging index with hand-coding and show which sectors (agriculture, services, digital trade) exhibit ambiguity. The study identifies narrative patterns that may dilute bargaining credibility and proposes fixes: plain-language commitment templates, translation support, and negotiation briefs with verifiable timelines.