Table 4.
Types of impact assessment required or recommended by partner organizations
| Focus topic for impact assessment | Multilaterals identified | Bilaterals identified | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Funding support | Technical support | ||
| Environment and social | EIB [95]; World Bank [96] | OECD [91]; WHO [97]a | France [98]; Germany [99]; Japan [100]; Saudi Arabia [101] |
| Sustainability | – | OECD [91]; WHO [97]a | France [102, 103]; Germany [99]; Norway [104]; Saudi Arabia [101] |
| Development / aid quality or effectiveness | AfDB [105–107]; EIB [108]; Gavi [53] | – | Australia [109]; EC [110] |
| Gender equality | EIB [111] | OECD [112] | Canada [113] |
| Health | ADB [114] | WHO [115, 116] | EC [110] |
| Economy | EIB [117, 118] | Germany [99] | |
| Employment | EIB [119] | EC [110] | |
| Health workforce | Global Fund [46] | WHO [94, 120] | – |
| Risk mitigation | – | – | Canada [121]; UK [122]b |
| Social | EIB [95] | – | France [98] |
| Epidemiology | Global Fund [123] | – | – |
| Infrastructure | World Bank [124] | – | – |
| Poor and marginalized groups | – | – | Canada [125] |
| Regulation | – | OECD [126] | – |
aThe original search found an earlier version of this page, which is no longer available, so it was replaced with an updated link
bIncluding risks of unintended consequences