The Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FFD4) is taking shape with all the hallmarks of a serious international process—policy dialogues, draft outcome documents, and preparatory committees. But behind the procedural formality lies a growing concern: aid transparency is being quietly sidelined.

During yesterday’s opening session of the intersessional consultations, representatives from every UN member state had the opportunity to champion transparency. Not one did.

This silence is striking. At a time when transparency is more vital than ever – to ensure that development finance is accountable, effective, and truly responsive to those it aims to serve -it appears to be falling off the agenda altogether. And all this against a backdrop of cuts to aid and scepticism about its use, increasing the scarcity of development resources and increasing the pressure to know how it’s being spent and its impact.

The most notable omission is any mention regarding the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI). Despite being a longstanding pillar of open data and accountability, included in the outcome documents of previous conferences in Addis, Accra, and Busan, it is conspicuously absent from both the zero draft (January 2025) and first draft (March 2025) of the FFD4 outcome document.

Why should IATI be included in FFD4?

IATI is the global standard for publishing open data on development and humanitarian funding. It enables real-time, detailed, and project-level transparency, improving coordination, accountability, and decision-making. Most of the world’s major donors publish their aid information using the IATI standard, and today 17 partner countries ingest IATI into their national budgeting and public financial management systems. IATI data has become a vital source of information for journalists, governments, CSOs and accountability groups.

Other key mechanisms for transparency and effectiveness, such as Total Official Support for Sustainable Development (TOSSD) and the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (GPEDC), have faced challenges throughout the negotiation but have nevertheless remained in the text. While some stakeholders continue to push for their inclusion, it’s been an uphill battle – raising uncomfortable questions about the direction and ambition of the FFD4 process.

What is the current state of aid transparency?

This apparent lack of political will comes at a time when major transparency gaps remain unaddressed. While the latest Aid Transparency Index highlights some encouraging progress – with more agencies than ever receiving high scores, this should not mask the deeper issues that persist.

The Index has been a valuable driver of change, helping to improve policy and practice across the sector. But these improvements are uneven and incomplete. Too many organisations still fail to publish timely, detailed, and accessible data. Crucially, information on results and impact remains patchy at best -making it difficult to assess whether development finance is actually delivering for the people it’s meant to serve. High-quality evaluations do exist in the IATI dataset, but they remain the exception, not the norm.

The 2023 DFI Transparency Index tells a similar story. Development finance institutions (DFIs), especially in their non-sovereign operations, are not yet transparent enough. Too often, key information about investments, impact, mobilisation, and community accountability is still missing.

Why is transparency central to the development finance system?

So, the tools and momentum are there. But the FFD4 process risks squandering this progress by failing to make a firm commitment to transparency. This isn’t just about reinstating a shared commitment to IATI in the outcome document -it’s about reaffirming the central role of transparency in shaping a development finance system that is equitable, accountable, and locally led.

Transparency is not an abstract ideal. It’s a means of shifting power – away from donor capitals towards communities. It enables coordination, scrutiny, participation, and ultimately, better outcomes.

FFD4 could still be a turning point. But only if transparency is put front and centre in the global development agenda.