Replenishment rounds

The IDA is a unique part of the World Bank as it requires continuous replenishment of its resources. Member countries replenish its funds through contributions in addition to supplementary funds provided by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Finance Corporation (IFC). Whereas the IBRD acquires most of its funds by raising capital on international financial markets, the IDA heavily depends on contributions from its member states. The IDA received 2 billion in special drawing rights ($3 billion USD) from the IBRD and IFC. Approximately half of the IDA's resources come from the 45 donating member countries. In its early years, the IDA received most of its replenishments from the United Kingdom and United States but, because they were not always reliable sources of funding, other developed nations began to step in and fill the economic gaps not met by these two countries. Every three years, member nations that provide funds to the IDA gather together to replenish the IDA's resources. These funds come primarily from well-developed countries including the United States, Japan, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom with 58% from the US, 22% from France, and 8% from the UK. As of 2016, there have been 18 IDA replenishment rounds. Fifty one member countries participated in the IDA's 16th replenishment of US$49.3 billion. The IDA's loans and grants are usually not paid in full to the borrower at the outset, but rather disbursed incrementally as needed by the project. Most of the donor countries such as the United States commit letters of credit to the IDA which bear no interest and are not able to be transferred or revoked, and which are exchanged for cash as needed for project disbursal. Other countries pay their contributions in full on the date of commitment to the IDA so that it may cover its operating expenses. Donors receive no return of funds and repayments from borrowers are again loaned to future projects such that donors won't need to commit those funds again in the future.

Although the IDA's funds are now regularly replenished, this does not happen without some financial and political challenges for the donating countries. When donor countries convene to negotiate the replenishments, there is often intense discussion about redefining the association's goals and objectives or even about reforming the IDA. Due to delays in the United States Congress impeding the approval of IDA funding, the association's members implemented a set of policy triggers outlining the commitment threshold necessary for replenishment to take effect. The threshold imposed a requirement that an aggregate share of 85% in voting stock is necessary for executing a replenishment. The threshold was implemented with the aim to compel the United States to participate in replenishment rounds. Though countries intended for the triggers to hold the United States to its commitments, the threshold ultimately provided the United States a de facto veto power over replenishment and capital increase negotiations due to its ability to bring replenishment negotiations to an impasse by threatening to withhold support. The U.S. has used this influence to further its long-term foreign policy objectives and short-term political and economic goals by imposing conditionality on replenishment negotiations.dubious – discuss