The post-Axel era at the World Bank

At a packed retirement party in November, colleagues handed Axel van Trotsenburg a poster reading “$700 billion man” — the sum his supporters say he helped raise for the World Bank over nearly four decades. From a member of the bank’s Young Professional Program to senior managing director, the bank’s second-highest role, Axel was a central figure whose influence shaped the institution as presidents came and went during his 37-year tenure. Inside 1818 H Street at the bank’s headquarters in Washington, D.C, he was feared and respected. Colleagues spoke of his courtesy, and one recalled a janitor at the Washington HQ who said he liked Axel because he always stopped to say good morning. NGOs, however, were so eager to see him step aside that they staged a mock retirement party outside the bank in 2024, protesting his long tenure. Those competing views — of an indispensable insider and an immovable force — highlight the adjustment the bank now faces. Interviews with more than a dozen current and former senior bank officials, donors, civil society figures, and former shareholders depict an institution still finding its footing in a post-Axel era. Nowhere is his influence more evident than at the International Development Association, or IDA, the bank’s concessional lending arm for the world’s poorest countries. “This is a really consequential moment,” said Clemence Landers of the Center for Global Development. “Axel had been deeply involved in keeping IDA replenishments running for more than two decades. How that part of the equation works going forward is a big open question.” Most don’t doubt Axel’s dedication to the bank and its mission to eradicate poverty. But for critics, this loyalty — at times described as a “World Bank or bust mindset” — could also be a hindrance, blinding him to new opportunities and the need for deeper reform. His approach may have helped preserve the bank’s relevance through successive crises, they say, but it increasingly clashed with shrinking aid budgets, rising skepticism toward multilateralism, and growing pressure to collaborate across MDBs and sources of capital. His departure creates space within the 81-year-old institution. President Ajay Banga gains greater room to maneuver; Anna Bjerde inherits an operations portfolio that Axel was known to shadow; and Paschal Donohoe, a former Irish finance minister, brings an outside political sensibility to the role of managing director and chief knowledge officer. Insiders caution, however, that previous outside hires have often struggled to gain lasting influence inside the bank. Axel, who hasn't publicly declared what he's doing next, will undoubtedly be missed by many at the bank. Whether his leaving signals the end of a glorious era or a long-overdue moment for change, the question remains: can anyone fill his shoes? Master of the institution Born in the Netherlands and educated in Austria, including a Ph.D. in Economics from the University of Vienna as well as degrees in international affairs from the Johns Hopkins University in Bologna, Italy, and Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada, Axel had the academic credentials to match his operational acumen. Insiders often joked — or whispered — that he liked to talk, sometimes too much. Yet beneath the words was a relentless executor, raising billions, steering complex negotiations, and keeping the bank’s machinery running in a way few others could. Having joined in 1988, he quickly rose through the ranks from a young professional, including country economist positions in Guatemala and Côte d'Ivoire, to country director roles across Latin America. Vice president positions followed, then managing director of operations, culminating in senior managing director, responsible for development policy and partnerships, in 2023. The senior managing director role was itself unusual. The title had not previously existed at the World Bank and has not been used since, leading some to see it as proof of Axel’s influence — his ability to conjure a title out of thin air. Others, however, viewed it as a compromise. The bank had earlier introduced a new title of chief executive officer for Kristalina Georgieva, who came to the bank in 2017 from the European Commission. After she left to head the International Monetary Fund, Axel served as acting CEO but did not retain the title, which a number of sources called a significant indicator of the limits to his influence. While opinions on Axel's methods and approach may vary, there was unanimous agreement on one thing: his unwavering commitment to eradicating poverty and his unparalleled ability to make the World Bank function at its best, namely, getting money in and out of the door. Yvonne Tsikata, former vice president and corporate secretary at the World Bank, who worked closely with Axel for many years, called him “essential” to the 2018 capital increase, when shareholders agreed to inject $13 billion into the institution. “Axel was someone who saw the big picture but also had a handle on the technical details,” she said, noting his ability to work with and persuade different shareholders while also explaining and overseeing the technical aspects of the policy package that secured the 2018 increase, as well as successive IDA replenishments. He also spearheaded the bank’s fast-response COVID-19 package in 2020. Earlier, as country director for Colombia and Mexico from 2007 to 2009, a former colleague recalled, Axel famously “shoveled” $2 billion out of the door to Mexico in just two weeks during the global financial crisis. Alexia Latortue, former U.S. Treasury lead on the World Bank, said: “Axel was a powerhouse in terms of mobilizing resources for countries.” “Axel was a really instrumental operator — he delivered hundreds of billions for development finance,” said Qahir Dhanani, who leads BCG’s engagements with multilateral and international financial institutions and previously served as an adviser to the World Bank’s CEO. He said Axel was “beloved in the external environment,” adding that “all the donors knew him by name, knew him personally and valued his insights.” “The World Bank has lost one of the most skilled diplomats in the development space,” Dhanani added. A paradigm shift on debt One of Axel’s early achievements was orchestrating the HIPC Initiative in 1996, which offered debt relief to nations burdened by crippling obligations. In a recent interview at CGD, Axel described HIPC as a “paradigm shift,” with multilateral institutions offering debt relief to qualifying countries without having to go through long negotiations. Jamie Drummond, co-founder of ONE and founder of Sharing Strategies, crossed paths with Axel in the early 2000s while he was a global strategist for Drop the Debt, which helped cancel $110 billion of mainly African debt. Drummond described Axel as “instrumental” in the design of debt relief programs back then and praised his more recent efforts on radical debt transparency, but said that ultimately, Axel was too much of a company man to deliver the radical and accountable outcomes needed now. His loyalty to the bank could end up slowing things down, Drummond said. “Axel is someone who cares passionately about development, equality, and keeping the multilateral system going, but in the end, maybe he can get too stuck in the weeds of the system, which he understandably loves to preserve, instead of ensuring urgent outcomes for people and what it’s all ultimately for.” Reformer or resistor? For some, Axel’s deep loyalty to the bank made him resistant to reform, especially if those reforms challenged traditional ways of doing things. Bright Simons, a Ghanaian policy activist, entrepreneur, and founder of mPedigree — an initiative that allows consumers to verify the authenticity of medicines via mobile phones — recalled challenging Axel during a panel at last year’s Skoll Forum. Simons highlighted the gap between reported project completions and what was actually visible on the ground in Ghana. He proposed equipping citizens with tools such as QR codes to report progress, improving accountability, and encouraging community involvement. Axel, however, was not receptive, Simons said. The senior managing director maintained that the bank’s existing accountability systems were adequate and that any shortcomings stemmed from underutilization rather than systemic flaws. “He was part of the grand establishment, very bank-centric, and focused on the traditional bank-host-country model,” Simons said. “He didn’t seem excited by new approaches.” Simons added, arguing that relying solely on host governments for verification “isn’t enough.” Other sources described Axel as actively blocking institutional reforms over the years. Notably, during former President Jim Yong Kim’s 2014 effort to globalize the balance of expertise and resources away from regional offices and consolidate it under centralized “global practices.” The effort was designed to break down so-called siloes. Axel, then vice president for East Asia and the Pacific, reportedly viewed the initiative as “taking away his power,” according to a source close to the process. After Jim Yong Kim left and Axel moved up the ranks, the source said he “systematically rolled back the reforms and inadvertently brought back all the old issues.” Given Axel’s well-known reticence toward change, numerous sources said they were surprised that Ajay Banga did not remove him after becoming president. One suggested reason was his strong ties with the donor community. “Internally, he was a guy stuck in the past, but his value was so incredible in terms of funding and keeping the donors happy that Ajay kept him on,” an insider said. Leveraging IDA Arguably, Axel’s most consequential legacy lies in his stewardship of IDA. Over four replenishment cycles, he became deeply involved in both the technical design and the political negotiations underpinning IDA’s financing model, at a time when donor appetite for aid was under increasing strain. As vice president for development finance from 2016 to 2019, Axel oversaw a shift that fundamentally altered how IDA operates. Historically reliant on donor contributions and loan repayments recycled through a cash-pool model, IDA began issuing bonds on capital markets for the first time, enabled by the bank’s triple-A credit rating. The move significantly expanded IDA’s lending capacity. In 2016, IDA made its first market issuance, marking a departure from decades of practice. By the 2024 replenishment, pledges reached $23.7 billion, which the bank said would translate into roughly $100 billion in concessional financing through IDA’s leveraging model. Supporters say the shift helped insulate IDA from stagnating or shrinking aid budgets in many donor countries. Axel played a central role in navigating shareholder concerns about the risks of market borrowing, while also reassuring donors that the concessional nature of IDA financing would be preserved. However, some insiders cautioned against overstating his role. They noted that the concept of taking IDA to the markets predated Axel and was developed under then-CFO Bertrand Badré between 2013 and 2016. According to several former officials, Axel was initially sceptical of the idea before later embracing it. That caution, former colleagues said, was characteristic of his broader approach to IDA. While widely admired for defending the institution’s role and relevance, Axel’s IDA-first mindset could also act as a constraint. Several former staff described him as deeply protective of IDA’s primacy within the bank’s financing architecture — sometimes to the frustration of those seeking to expand alternative sources of development finance. One former colleague described Axel as “arrogant” in his conviction that only he could shepherd IDA through replenishments, a stance they said limited space for senior deputies to take on greater responsibility. Others said his singular focus on IDA left little room for experimentation with climate finance mechanisms or private capital mobilization. Tensions were particularly visible around the Climate Investment Funds, or CIF, which some former staff said Axel viewed as a potential competitor to IDA. Last January, CIF issued its first bond, raising more than $3 billion from the markets. According to sources familiar with the discussions, the move could have happened years earlier but faced internal resistance, including from Axel, who was wary of overlapping mandates and market competition. Supporters counter that this caution reflected legitimate concerns about fragmentation and cost. One senior official, speaking on background, said Axel worried that expanding multiple market-based vehicles could ultimately erode IDA’s concessional advantage by driving up borrowing costs for the poorest countries. Even so, critics argue that this approach sometimes slowed efforts to mobilize private finance. As one former colleague put it, Axel was “very much a bank guy, not a World Bank Group guy,” adding that in some cases, the most effective solution may not have been an IDA loan at all. Loved, hated, feared Understanding Axel’s grip on IDA also requires understanding how he wielded power inside the institution. Over nearly four decades, Axel accumulated influence that went well beyond any single formal title. Colleagues described him as inspiring but overbearing, a dominant presence in meetings with a habit of talking too much. One insider said he was “the last of the Mohicans,” part of a generation that knew “the history, the compromises, and how to get things done” within the bank, which gave him authority few were willing to challenge. Some described him as a good boss — hardworking but fair. Former colleagues said he promoted diversity, spotted talent, and took a personal interest in developing staff. Over time, he cultivated a network of protégés — sometimes referred to internally as “Axelites” — who now occupy senior positions across the institution. Outside the institution, Axel ran up against civil society groups that were openly hostile to him, many arguing that he blocked progress on key reforms, particularly on climate. Sophie Richmond of the Big Shift Campaign said he “represents an outdated system” and part of a leadership “that has failed to deliver the reforms needed to address today’s climate and development crises.” Meanwhile, Bronwen Tucker of Oil Change International added that he “stalled progress on climate at the WBG … especially around fossil fuels.” However, Axel’s caution over climate could also reflect political realities, including the need to keep the United States — the bank and IDA’s largest donor — engaged. Managing to expand climate lending while appeasing a climate-skeptic shareholder was no mean feat, sources said. Whatever view one takes, most agree that Axel represented a vanishing breed within the World Bank: a career insider who rose through the ranks over decades, mastering the institution’s internal mechanics and using that knowledge to get things done. His departure marks not just the end of an era, but the unraveling of a particular way power was exercised inside the bank — one rooted in longevity, personal authority, and deep familiarity with the system’s limits as well as its possibilities. And while his departure means a loss of institutional knowledge, it is ultimately a normal and constructive part of organizational evolution, bringing new blood into the development finance institution and breaking the cycle of senior officials with very long tenures, according to Latortue. “Axel is a huge loss, but it’s also healthy. No one will be Axel again, but they’ll bring something else,” she said. Redistribution of influence With Axel’s departure, the World Bank has the chance to recalibrate. Banga now has greater room to execute his agenda, and the incoming managing director and chief knowledge officer, Donohoe, an outsider and politician, could help the institution steer through tricky global politics. He may also “round out Ajay’s blunter edges” when it comes to managing staff, according to one source. Donohoe has already started a charm offensive with staff, insiders said, which may assuage discontent over Banga’s controversial staffing reforms. For many, the bigger question remains IDA. Observers note that Axel had been deeply involved in keeping IDA replenishments running for more than two decades, and how that part of the equation works going forward is still an open question. The post-Axel era will test whether IDA’s financial model remains fit for a world of shrinking aid budgets and rising demands, requiring both technical and political leadership to convince donors to continue investing in the world’s poorest countries. “A lot about IDA is going to need to change if it’s going to remain an essential port of call,” CGD’s Landers said. Reflecting on Axel’s broader legacy, Masood Ahmed, CGD’s president emeritus, said: “There are many people who go through long careers in institutions, but their impact is often uneven. The difference with Axel is that he’s worked in many areas — finance, operations, policy, debt relief, and knowledge. Everywhere he’s been, you’ll see things that are different because of the changes made during his time. The impact of what he has done on the institution and its support for member countries is going to be there for a long time. There aren’t many people you can say that about.”