After months of intense negotiation, the fourth Financing for Development conference, or FfD4, kicks off today in a scorching Sevilla, where the temperature today is forecast to hit 41.7 degrees Celsius (107 degrees Fahrenheit).
This year’s gathering isn’t about hammering out new deals — negotiators arrive with a draft agreement already in hand. Instead, the next four days will focus on the far trickier challenge: How to actually implement the promises made.
The deal, reached only after the U.S. withdrew over what it called too many “red lines,” is a compromise — with developed countries recognizing the crushing debt burdens on many developing nations and the need for a reformed global financial architecture. Yet, several developed nations “disassociated” themselves from key sections on debt and climate, signaling neither full endorsement nor outright opposition.
Still, United Nations Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed hailed the outcome as a “significant, albeit imperfect, win for multilateralism.” Key highlights include doubling support to help countries boost their tax revenues, creating a global playbook for Special Drawing Rights (those international reserve assets that countries swap for hard currency), and a call to triple the financing capacity of multilateral development banks — though without the original ambitious timelines.
The topics
• Debt: The document promises to “close gaps” in debt architecture and create a unified global debt data registry, but it stops short of launching a new debt relief mechanism. Many developing countries see this as a first step, while some wealthy nations remain wary.
• Climate: The inclusion of the Rio Declaration on environmental responsibility, alongside principles of “common but differentiated responsibilities,” pleased low-income countries — though some high-income nations lamented the softening of climate language after last-minute U.S. withdrawal.
• Taxes: The text encourages international tax cooperation but keeps commitments voluntary, with light mentions of gender-responsive and wealth taxes.
• Multilateral development banks: A pledge to immediately triple MDB financing for developing countries signals ambition — but specifics and timelines were watered down.
Read more: Defining a decade — what to expect from Financing for Development
The elephant not in the room
The U.S. absence allowed consensus but raised concerns about how far the agreement can go without the world’s largest economy at the table. The country’s involvement in the preparatory meetings also made its mark — essentially shaping the final text and then pulling out just before it had to be signed.
My colleague Colum Lynch dug into the U.S.’ red lines — all 400 of them — in the draft text before the U.S. made its move.
Time will tell what the impact of the U.S. withdrawal is on the meetings. Experts such as Shari Spiegel of the United Nations’ Financing for Sustainable Development Office are optimistic: “The world is coming together, with or without the U.S.”
ICYMI: US seeks to gut UN development goals
See also: US abandons Financing for Development conference
The starting line
As negotiators shift focus to implementation, Sevilla becomes the launchpad for the Sevilla Platform for Action, a collaborative effort among governments, banks, and stakeholders to turn promises into progress. Outside the official talks, expect a whirlwind of side events — from marches through the historic cobblestone streets to an ice cream event cheekily sloganed “Taxing the rich never tasted so good.”
As the temperature rises in the Andalusian sun, so does the pressure on world leaders to deliver real change. Experts say Sevilla is not the finish line — it’s where the real work begins.
Background: What is Financing for Development 4 and why is it a big deal? (Pro)
Shari shares her view
As a key figure who helped shape the recently agreed outcome, Shari Spiegel is someone to watch. We got an inside scoop from her prior to the conference.
Spiegel says that while the document will be ratified again in Sevilla, she expects little change on the agreements, noting “most every country will take the same position they took [in New York].” She emphasizes the shift toward implementation and private-sector engagement through the upcoming Business Forum.
On climate and debt, Spiegel acknowledges criticisms but highlights progress: “The goal here wasn’t to replicate [the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change],” but FfD remains “very, very relevant” to climate finance. On debt, she points to agreements to “institutionalize a lot of the ongoing work” and calls for better coordination, including a “borrowers’ club” to give developing countries a stronger voice.
Regarding the U.S. absence, Spiegel is pragmatic: “It is what it is. ... the rest of the world wants to come together to move this forward.” Though there are some actions that will require U.S. involvement, she says Spain’s Sevilla Platform for Action is already pushing forward initiatives.
For Spiegel, FfD4 is a moment to “celebrate the agreement, to bring attention to it, and then also to start to move into the next phase” — focused on financing sustainable development through global collaboration.
Read: A Q&A with the woman who helped shape the Sevilla Platform for Action (Pro)
+ A Devex Pro membership helps sustain the journalism we’re able to bring you, and for members, it offers an even deeper analysis of the development sector, exclusive events and conversations with leaders on timely issues facing the sector in these dire times, access to the world’s largest global development job board for career resources and recruitment insights, and more. Try it out today by signing up for a 15-day free trial.
The road here
Ten years ago, world leaders gathered in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and dreamed big — mobilize trillions, turbocharge tax systems, and unleash the private sector to close the gap on global development finance. The 2015 International Conference on Financing for Development gave birth to the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, promising a new era of collaboration and cash to help developing countries build their futures. Back then, official aid was peaking, optimism was high, and “billions to trillions” became the rallying cry for unlocking private investment.
Fast forward to 2025, and the dream feels … complicated. Aid budgets are shrinking, debt is skyrocketing, foreign direct investment is at its lowest since 2005, and illicit financial flows keep siphoning off precious resources from the global south. Despite incremental progress — such as a new U.N. tax cooperation framework and renewed calls to tax the superrich — many of Addis’ bold promises remain just that: promises. Experts warn that the political will needed to turn declarations into action is missing, while new crises keep piling on.
Now, with 10,000 delegates converging on Spain for the next installment, the stakes are higher than ever. The world faces a daunting question: How do we pay for sustainable development when official aid is shrinking, debt burdens are crushing, and private investment is still far from trillions? The hope is to find new answers — or at least a fresh consensus — for a vastly changed global landscape. Spoiler alert: It won’t be easy.
Read: What happened at the last FfD conference, and what has changed since?
The changing face of debt swaps
In an environment marked by aid cuts, high debt costs, and constrained public budgets, debt swaps offer a strategic path forward — allowing countries to refinance commercial debt at lower cost and channel savings into priority development areas such as health, education, agriculture, and climate resilience, argues Adil Ababou, senior program officer at the Gates Foundation, in an opinion piece for Devex.
He urges policymakers and financiers gathered at FfD4 to take a closer look at the underused but increasingly powerful tool. Once limited to donor debt cancellations, debt swaps have evolved. In recent years, seven countries — mainly in the Americas — have implemented nine large-scale commercial debt swap agreements, unlocking $1.7 billion in nominal financing and easing debt burdens. From climate-smart initiatives in Barbados to education investments in Côte d’Ivoire, and health-focused swaps backed by The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the model is proving adaptable and impactful.
Ababou argues that debt swaps, when aligned with national priorities and embedded in long-term strategies, can provide predictable, multidecade financial flows that complement other funding mechanisms — without crowding out essential public spending. He calls on governments and development partners to treat debt swaps not as a silver bullet, but as a vital component in a broader, smarter financing mix.
“All these evolutions are evidence that we are entering a new phase in the scale-up of debt swaps,” he writes. “That represents an opportunity for governments and creditors.”
Opinion: Debt swaps can play key role in tackling the development crisis
▶️ Don’t miss: Calls for overhaul of global debt architecture intensify ahead of FfD4 (Pro)
+ Keep your eyes on our dedicated page for all of our FfD4 coverage and programming, which will include an on-the-ground detailing of events in our daily reporter’s notebook and another special newsletter to round it all up next week.
And if you’re in Sevilla, drop by Casa Devex — until July 1, this exclusive gathering space at a historic Spanish villa will feature nightly networking, journalist-led briefings and live interviews, and high-level private events and receptions. Request an invite.
Sign up to Newswire for an inside look at the biggest stories in global development.
About the author
Jesse Chase-Lubitz
Jesse Chase-Lubitz covers climate change and multilateral development banks for Devex. She previously worked at Nature Magazine, where she received a Pulitzer grant for an investigation into land reclamation. She has written for outlets such as Al Jazeera, Bloomberg, the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, and The Japan Times, among others. Jesse holds a master’s degree in Environmental Policy and Regulation from the London School of Economics.
