This chapter analyses global data trends in triangular co-operation, examining who engages and in which regions and sectors by drawing on global, regional and national reporting initiatives. It also identifies caveats to existing reporting practices and underscores the importance of capturing the distinctive features of triangular co-operation, including how to value in-kind contributions.
Global Perspectives on Triangular Co‑operation 2025
Abstract
In the Seville Commitment issued at the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4) in 2025, the international community pledged:
… to enhance triangular cooperation by fostering deeper collaboration and partnerships, ensuring knowledge exchange, aligning efforts with the Sustainable Development Goals, and leveraging innovative financing mechanisms to enhance its sustainability and impact. (UN, 2025, p. 18[1])
This commitment rests on the assumption that the international community will have the data and evidence from the results and impacts of partnerships from which to draw lessons about their implementation. Having, and adequately using, the necessary data also help shape policy, bridge the gap between development needs and knowledge, make informed decisions, and use resources more effectively. Indeed, how data are managed is a key question, argued Australia’s Minister for International Development Anne Aly, speaking at a side event at FfD4. “Because in development,” she said, “data is power, but only when it is usable, when it is inclusive and when it is connected” (Aly, 2025[2]).
All three of these requirements are important challenges for data collection on triangular co-operation. The first edition of this report published in 2023 highlighted that no single, consistent and comprehensive database exists that gives a clear overview of the who, what, where, when and how of triangular co-operation across the globe (OECD/IsDB, 2023[3]). But different databases, as discussed in this chapter, offer insights into different parts of the big picture. Significant blind spots exist in data on triangular co-operation regarding the composition of partnerships and the contributions made to the initiative by all partners involved. A key function of effectively used data is to drive smarter policy decisions. In the case of triangular co-operation, there is a risk that policymaking and data are not connected. Data gaps may make decisions more difficult and costly because the full scope of triangular co-operation by all three or more partners – pivotal, facilitating and benefitting partners, public and private partners, and in-kind and financial contributions, etc. – is not being captured. Furthermore, the different existing databases are not yet connected, which generates reporting burdens.
A significant outcome of FfD4 in terms of increasing interoperability was the launch of the Bridging Data Systems for Financing for Development initiative under the Sevilla Platform for Action, co-led by the International Forum on Total Official Support on Sustainable Development (TOSSD), the OECD, the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI) and the United Nations (UN) Systems Chief Executives Board for Coordination (UN CEB) Secretariat. This new partnership aims to reduce reporting burdens and improve interoperability across international data systems; it is a sign that enhanced collaboration among key data initiatives, a new UN measurement on South-South co-operation and more solid reporting in TOSSD are changing the data ecosystem.
This chapter focuses on how to better understand the existing data on triangular co-operation, identifies information that is still missing in the monitoring of global trends of triangular co-operation and pinpoints the considerations specific to triangular co-operation that should be reflected in regard to interoperability of statistical frameworks.
A range of measurement initiatives to identify and disaggregate triangular co-operation data have been put in place over the last decade at the international and regional levels (Table 2.1), alongside national efforts by some countries to improve, develop or adjust their data systems and procedures. Reporting on triangular co-operation is steadily improving as a growing and diverse set of governments and international and regional organisations are using TOSSD, the only database with global information on triangular co-operation and the primary source of information for this chapter. This improvement contrasts with persistent data gaps, among them one-sided inputs in the form of financial contributions mainly by providers for beneficiaries, differences in granularity and quality, the predominance of financial flows over in-kind contributions, and under-represented regions and actors.
Created in response to the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, TOSSD encompasses ODA flows, other official flows (OOF), South-South co-operation, triangular co-operation, spending for international public goods and private finance mobilised by official interventions that support the SDGs (International Forum on TOSSD, 2024[4]). There are intersections between those categories; for example, the funding reported by DAC members on triangular co-operation in TOSSD may also be ODA.
The OECD Creditor Reporting System (CRS), which is used to report ODA, relies on disbursement data reported by the provider. Of the 33 OECD DAC members, 18 reported triangular co-operation activities at least once between 2016 and 2023, together totalling more than 3 000 activities.
In 2022, the UN Statistical Commission and the UN General Assembly adopted the initial voluntary Framework to Measure South-South Cooperation (Box 2.1). It was an important advance in South-South co-operation measurement, and followed several years of analysis, debate, proposals and diverse practices by different national, regional and international institutions on how best to measure South-South co-operation.
The United Nations Framework to Measure South-South Cooperation was developed by the countries of the Global South and welcomed by all countries at the United Nations Statistical Commission in 2022. It is specifically designed to capture all intricacies of South-South co-operation and includes financial flows, monetised non-financial flows and non-financial flows that are not monetised. The Framework is based on a detailed typology of different South-South co-operation flows to ensure that all countries can capture flows relevant to their collaboration.
In 2023, UNCTAD jointly with UN Regional Commissions, UNDESA and the UN Office for South-South Cooperation (UNOSSC) launched a global project to pilot test the UN Framework and build capacities in the countries of the Global South to collect and report data. The first five countries reported preliminary data in the UN Framework by mid- 2025. Preliminary data from pioneering countries like Brazil, Colombia and Mexico reveal the importance of in-kind flows, underlining the importance of a tailored, detailed approach for their reporting. For these countries, 90% of South-South co-operation flows are delivered through non-financial modalities. These flows related to infrastructure projects, goods and materials delivered, scholarships, humanitarian assistance, and technical co-operation and joint research, among others, are captured in the UN Framework based on comparable methods, alongside financial resources such as grants and concessional loans.
Data reporting in the UN Framework also provides detailed information on reported triangular co-operation activities with Southern country engagement. In the early data, bilateral frameworks remain the most common form of South-South co-operation, particularly in sectors like health and education. At the same time, trilateral and multilateral co-operation frameworks are gaining traction as they allow countries to pool expertise, share risks and scale impact.
Source: Authors’ compilation based on exchanges with UNCTAD.
The framework is designed to inform SDG indicator 17.3.1 (additional financial resources mobilised for developing countries from multiple sources) and to capture the different types of South-South co-operation activities. It is currently being piloted with Ecuador, Jordan, Malaysia, Namibia, Nigeria, Peru and Qatar. The framework focuses on the contribution reported by the Southern provider beyond financial flows, which is the conventional metric to measure development co-operation efforts. Countries will be able to report the following items: financial contributions, monetised non-financial contributions and contributions measured through non-monetary units (UNCTAD, 2025[5]).
The reporting manual for the UN framework, published in 2025 by the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), also indicates that trilateral and triangular co-operation is considered a type of South-South co-operation. This can be identified with a specific code for the co-operation framework and by adding the number of additional partners. The manual also notes that South-South co-operation:
has different modalities depending on the country which may be challenging to account for in an internationally comparable way and that the Framework should allow flexible application to different national contexts and priorities. (UNCTAD, 2025, p. 8[5])
TOSSD has adopted the same conceptual framework, which follows UN agreements, since 2022, allowing countries, territories and multilateral institutions to report their triangular co-operation without financial flows by providing information such as the project title and activities. The Dominican Republic, Indonesia and Mexico are doing this.
Regionally, the Ibero-American General Secretariat (SEGIB) runs the most comprehensive database on South-South and triangular co-operation. Its Integrated Ibero-American Data System on South-South and Triangular Cooperation (SIDICSS) uses the number of initiatives as the main reference for the analysis of trends in triangular co-operation over the past 15 years, and is the only framework focused on the initiative as a whole rather than the input of the providers (Box 2.3). All Ibero-American countries, regardless of whether they participated as providers, pivotal partners or beneficiaries, report and update the information on their South-South and triangular co-operation projects and activities during the reporting period (SEGIB, 2025[6]). Through the SIDICSS, SEGIB also allows countries participating in the same project to complement any reported information and resolve information discrepancies. With 15 years’ worth of information, SEGIB has been able to produce specific analyses on triangular co-operation trends, including analyses on sectors, supporting mechanisms, strengthened capacities, and the distribution of initiatives by roles and partners within and outside the region.
The SEGIB evidence (Box 2.3) highlights the relevance of having structured mechanisms to catalyse triangular co-operation initiatives (SEGIB, 2024, p. 105[7]), among them Germany’s Regional Fund for Triangular Cooperation with Partners in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC); the European Union (EU) ADELANTE programme; Japan’s Third Country Partnership Program; and Spain’s funds (Chapter 4).
Another database, the OECD’s online project repository,1 is also based on the number of projects shared on a voluntary basis by partners in triangular co-operation (Table 2.1) (OECD/IsDB, 2023[3]; OECD, 2023[8]).
Note: SSC = South-South co-operation.
Source: Authors’ compilation based on (OECD/IsDB, 2023, p. 23[3]), Global Perspectives on Triangular Co-operation, https://doi.org/10.1787/29e2cbc0-en.
Since 2019, when TOSSD started monitoring triangular co-operation, the number of providers reporting engagement in this modality has doubled and reported disbursements have increased more than fourfold (Figure 2.1). Between 2019 and 2023, 36 countries and organisations reported over 4 800 triangular co-operation initiatives to TOSSD. While the volume of funding reported as disbursements is increasing, it remains low compared to overall flows of development co-operation.
Note: The bar shows disbursement in USD million constant 2023 prices. The line shows the number of activities.
Source: TOSSD (2025[9]), Data Visualisation Tool (database), https://tossd.online/.
2.2.1. What the data show about the regional distribution of triangular co-operation
Historically, reported triangular co-operation engagement has been largely concentrated in LAC. Nearly half of the disbursements reported in TOSSD in 2022 and 2023 (47%) went to this region, followed by Africa (22%) and Asia-Pacific (16%),2 which is in line with the findings of the previous edition of this report. Considering only CRS data from DAC members, Africa surpassed LAC in 2021 as the leading region benefitting from triangular co-operation disbursements (39% on average from 2022 to 2023), followed by LAC (22%), Asia-Pacific (18%), Europe, and the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) (1% each); 19% of reported activities did not specify the beneficiary country or region3 (Figure 2.2).
Note: The percentages do not add up to 100% because a small share of reported activities does not specify the beneficiary country or region.
Source: TOSSD (2025[9]), Data Visualisation Tool (database), https://tossd.online/.
A different regional distribution picture emerges from data on the number of TOSSD projects reported. In 2022, Africa hosted the greatest number of triangular partnerships with LAC edging into first place in 2023. The number of reported projects with the Asia-Pacific region dropped slightly over 2019-2023 (Figure 2.3).
Note: The percentages for each year do not add up to 100% because a small share of reported activities does not specify either the beneficiary country or region.
Source: TOSSD (2025[9]), Data Visualisation Tool (database), https://tossd.online/.
Deeper analysis of the data to identify the main actors and their roles in triangular co-operation requires some methodological disclaimers:
The reporting country or entity does not always identify the pivotal country in TOSSD. The pivotal partner (see Chapter 1 and Figure 1.1) can be identified in the channel of delivery or in the description field, though generally it is not. Nevertheless, some pivotal countries, in their capacity as Southern providers, directly report their engagement in triangular co-operation to TOSSD. In 2024, a new field was included in the TOSSD methodology to identify the pivotal partner (and other partners) of triangular co-operation activities. The field will be applicable to the reporting for 2024 activities and data included in the next edition of this report.
Southern providers that perform the role of pivotal partner often have bilateral agreements with a facilitating partner, such as an ODA provider, to engage in triangular co-operation with third partners. The funding from the facilitating partner is channelled in some cases to and through the pivotal partner. However, this pivotal partner is not the actual beneficiary, though in many instances that is how it is reported in TOSSD, potentially skewing the picture of benefitting partners shown in Table 2.2 and Table 2.3.
In TOSSD and the CRS, only one beneficiary can be reported in the recipient country field, resulting in incomplete information about the composition of triangular partnerships. If two countries from the same region benefit from a project, the activity will appear as a regional activity in TOSSD and the names of all beneficiary countries can be included in the title and/or description fields. When two or more countries from different regions benefit, the triangular co-operation is reported as global, which is also imprecise.
Particularly among DAC members, internal practices to record disbursements may limit the disaggregation of data. For example, some countries record the whole budget approved to a fund or programme as one data entry even if the programme supports dozens of projects, each with a different set of triangular partners. In other cases, triangular projects are considered components of bilateral or regional co-operation programmes, which are reported separately in TOSSD. It is often difficult to identify and report the information that is only specific to the trilateral partnership.
Some providers have reported data for just one year or have focused on commitments without including disbursement figures, and few included monetised in-kind contributions. In some cases, if the provider is reporting commitments to a fund, it might not be possible to report on partners as the projects are still in the process of being proposed or selected. Current rankings based on data reported for triangular partnerships are often a sign of the quality of reporting rather than engagement of partners in triangular co-operation. Many partners in triangular co-operation do not report their engagement regardless of whether it is through a financial contribution or through monetised and non-monetised in-kind contributions.
As providers in the same project report independently of one another, some projects may have been reported by more than one partner. There is no duplication in terms of disbursement, as each partner reports its own contributions. However, there is likely duplication when using the number of projects to analyse beneficiaries, regions and sectors, etc. In this regard, the clear identification of the project or activity would help data users better count the number of projects, thus reducing duplication.
2.2.2. What the data show about partners in triangular co-operation
Keeping in mind the abovementioned caveats, TOSSD data from 2022 and 2023 show that the countries reported as primary beneficiaries of triangular co-operation disbursements were (in descending order) Nicaragua, Indonesia, South Africa, Ethiopia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Colombia, Tanzania and Peru (Table 2.2). The disbursements in Nicaragua largely relate to major triangular infrastructure projects with the Central American Bank for Economic Integration (CABEI) in the water and sanitation sector. In general, support from a financial institution to a triangular partnership for an infrastructure project increases the volume of finance considerably, which is why Nicaragua became the top beneficiary, CABEI was the top provider, and water and sanitation was the largest sector for triangular co-operation in TOSSD disbursement data.
Disbursements, USD million, in constant 2023 prices
Note: 1. The category “developing countries, unspecified” means the activity benefited at least two countries from different continents. 2. Africa, America, Asia, and Oceania “regional” mean that two or more countries from these regions benefited in a triangular co-operation project.
Source: TOSSD (2025[9]), Data Visualisation Tool (database), https://tossd.online/.
In terms of the number of triangular projects, Bolivia and Ethiopia ranked highest among individual country beneficiaries and America and Africa ranked highest in terms of regional projects in 2022-2023 (Table 2.3).
By number of projects
Note: The category “developing countries, unspecified” means the activity benefited at least two countries from different continents.
Source: TOSSD (2025[9]), Data Visualisation Tool (database), https://tossd.online/.
CABEI and Switzerland started reporting to TOSSD in 2021 and now rank among the top five providers, together with the Global Green Growth Institute, Canada (reporting since 2019) and Germany (reporting since 2022) (Table 2.4).
Disbursements, USD million, in constant 2023 prices
Note: 1. Data related to the Global Green Growth Institute are under verification.
Source: TOSSD (2025[9]), Data Visualisation Tool (database), https://tossd.online/.
CRS data show Canada, the EU Institutions, Germany and Norway consistently among the top five DAC members reporting triangular co-operation to the CRS since 2019 in terms of both disbursements and the number of activities (Figure 2.4). Since the first edition of this report, it is also worth noting relevant reporting from Czechia, Greece, Korea and New Zealand, all among the top ten providers in 2022 and 2023.
Disbursement, USD million, in constant 2023 prices
Source: OECD Creditor Reporting System available at OECD Data Explorer: http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/1mx.
Analysis of TOSSD data on the number of projects shows Brazil, Ecuador and Chile were the top Southern providers in 2022-2023 (Table 2.5). It is worth noting that these three countries have a tradition of data management based on projects, and that for each project all partners are recorded with their specific role. This differs from the statistical systems of DAC members, which are mainly structured around ODA reporting based on disbursements. To gain a more comprehensive picture of global triangular co-operation, efforts to encourage interoperability of the different databases will have to address the frameworks’ different focuses.
By number of projects
Source: TOSSD (2025[9]), Data Visualisation Tool (database), https://tossd.online/.
2.2.3. What the data show about sectors in triangular co-operation
The triangular co-operation reported in the CRS shows continuing strong support for advancing gender equality, with 73% of projects reported using the gender marker – a much higher proportion than the 46% of overall ODA targeted towards gender in 2022 and 2023 (OECD, 2025[10]). In terms of the Rio markers, 29% of triangular co-operation during this two-year period contributed to the environment, 26% to climate mitigation, 23% to climate adaptation and 18% to biodiversity. The leading sectors for triangular projects in the previous edition of this report and according to other analyses were government and civil society (OECD/IsDB, 2023[3]; GPI on Effective Triangular Co-operation, 2019[11]); that sectoral distribution to government and civil society remained stable in terms of the number of projects (Figure 2.5). The 2022 and 2023 data reported to TOSSD show that an increasing number of projects were directed to water supply and sanitation, mainly reflecting the large infrastructure CABEI projects in Nicaragua. Reporting to the CRS showed a spike in 2022 in projects on health and a noteworthy increase over the past three years in projects focused on education, a break from the historical focus on government and civil society.
By number of projects
Source: TOSSD (2025[9]), Data Visualisation Tool (database), https://tossd.online/.
These project-related data differ significantly from data prior to 2022 in the OECD online triangular co-operation project repository. Infographic 2.1 shows the global picture of triangular co-operation over 2020-2022 based on data shared to the OECD project repository.
Note: ECIS = Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States; UNDP = United Nations Development Programme; IsDB = Islamic Development Bank; OFID = OPEC Fund for International Development; FAO = Food and Agriculture Organization; TrC = triangular co-operation.
Source: OECD/Islamic Development Bank (2023, p. 25[3]), Global Perspectives on Triangular Co-operation, https://doi.org/10.1787/29e2cbc0-en; OECD (2023[8]), Triangular co-operation repository of projects (database), https://web-archive.oecd.org/2019-10-07/420179-triangular-co-operation-repository.htm.
Today’s most comprehensive global database on triangular co-operation, TOSSD, shows how much money has been disbursed for triangular partnerships. A comparison with data derived from different databases, qualitative information on active projects and partners in triangular co-operation, and the concept of what it is intended to measure shows a different picture – and one with pieces missing.
Type of contributions. Disbursements and financial flows are not the main currency of triangular co-operation. Financing flows are usually just one type of resources contributed by partners for triangular co-operation. Many partnerships are built around the unhired knowledge shared between actors, a dynamic especially prevalent among Southern partners. Countries lend technical resources such as national experts working in specialised institutions for the purpose of sharing their knowledge with and/or providing guidance to peers from other countries. Partners may contribute in the form of in-kind inputs – for instance sharing their physical workspace, laboratories, substances and technical equipment, among other things – that foster learning for all partners. In-kind and unhired knowledge contributions are harder to quantify than monetary contributions, but not impossible. TOSSD allows for reporting in-kind contributions using non-financial units, though this option has not yet been used. Most Southern partners report monetised in-kind contributions as part of their overall TOSSD reporting, and a few report in-kind contributions with qualitative information on the project title, description, sector or other aspect without the financial information. The UN framework, still in a pilot stage, considers this dynamic, and the recently published manual for the measurement framework suggests it will allow for reporting quantifiable items in a way that fits different country contexts (UNCTAD, 2025[5]). SEGIB includes items such as costs and other contributions in its framework; data on this information are not public, however, and challenges persist regarding quality, completeness and comparability. Box 2.2 discusses further the challenges of measuring non-financial contributions.
Knowledge sharing is integral to triangular co-operation, which leverages not only financial but also technical in-kind resources from all partners that are often not monetised and thus not captured in available datasets. For example, deployment of government officials to provide technical support to triangular co-operation projects is covered through the salaries they are paid by the public institution that employs them. Those payments often are not accounted for as part of the contributions to the project.
As in-kind resources are central to triangular partnerships, there has been a long-standing interest in standardising how these contributions are measured in different systems. A range of options have been discussed at country, regional and global levels for several decades (PIFCSS, 2016[12]; PIFCSS, 2016[13]).
In TOSSD, the methodology allows for reporting of in-kind technical co-operation, which is understood as the use of public officials in the reporting country. Each reporting country monetises and reports the incurred salary costs in its local currency, and the Secretariat of the International Forum on TOSSD applies the purchasing power parity conversion factor for private consumption to those amounts, ensuring that salary costs are comparable among countries fairly (TOSSD, 2025[14]). In addition, TOSSD includes a dedicated field to report non-monetary quantifications, allowing for the reporting of activities without any financial information.
The new UN framework proposes a structure based on three groups: financial contributions; non-financial contributions that are monetised (such as technical hours and equipment); and non-financial contributions measured through non-monetary units that quantify the outputs (such as the number of scholarships awarded or of people trained). Establishing a non-monetary measure would increase the visibility of development co-operation beyond financial transfers (UNCTAD, 2025[5]).
The evolution of Brazilian co-operation reporting
Brazil regularly publishes a statistical report called Brazilian Cooperation for International Development, or COBRADI, that sets out both resources spent (financial and in-kind) and Brazil’s co-operation practices (type of activities and projects). In the past two decades, there has been a noteworthy effort to improve statistical accuracy and methodological consistency, including by quantifying non-financial contributions. As an example, in-kind contributions are monetised by measuring mission costs and related technical hours (including opportunity cost) based on each government employee’s gross salary.
Brazil has been active in international discussions on measuring South-South and triangular co-operation, both at the UN level and in the TOSSD framework. It also has worked to harmonise the COBRADI and TOSSD methodologies, having first reported part of its South-South and technical co-operation to TOSSD in 2020. The following year, Brazil reported ten times more activities and three times more amounts disbursed to TOSSD. The increased data on Brazilian triangular partnerships alone included a threefold increase in the number of activities reported and double the disbursements reported and monetised in-kind contributions. Brazil’s overall submission to TOSSD includes nearly 60 public entities at both national and subnational levels.
Source: PIFCSS (2016[13]), “Valorización de la cooperación Sur-Sur Estudios de Caso: Brasil, Chile y México” [Monetisation of South-South Co-operation Case Studies: Brazil, Chile and Mexico], https://www.cooperacionsursur.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/11-DT10.pdf; PIFCSS (2016[12]), “Valorización de la cooperación Sur-Sur: Avances y retos en Iberoamérica” [Monetisation of South-South Cooperation: Progress and challenges in Ibero-America], https://www.cooperacionsursur.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/12-DT09.pdf; TOSSD (2025[14]), TOSSD Reporting Instructions 2025, https://tossd.org/docs/reporting_instructions.pdf; UNCTAD (2025[5]), Manual for the Framework to Measure South-South Cooperation: Technical and Procedural Aspects for Pilot Testing, https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/tcsstatinf2025d1_en.pdf; Shleicher and Barros (2022[15]), “Medindo o gasto externo brasileiro para a implementação da Agenda 2030: o novo COBRADI 2021-2024” [Measuring Brazil’s external expenditure for the implementation of 2030 Agenda: The new COBRADI 2021-2024], http://dx.doi.org/10.38116/bepi33art5.
Partnership dimension and horizontality. Global databases are designed for the provider to report its contributions to one beneficiary or a group of beneficiaries, regardless of the how the co-operation is channelled. This approach overlooks what partnership looks like in triangular co-operation as well as the horizontal features of the triangular modality. The regional process agreed by the Ibero-American countries takes a different approach that itself is deliberately horizontal as these countries report as equals. All of them, regardless of their roles in bilateral, regional or triangular co-operation, are expected to report on the initiatives they are participating in and indicate their role, the type of co-operation and various characteristics of the initiative. Thus, the reporting framework is not designed for reporting by providers but is focused, as previously noted, on the initiative. This allows each triangular partnership to be cross-checked. The reporting process as such motivates dialogue among actors participating in one initiative to enhance the quality of information (SEGIB, 2024[7]). In TOSSD, as noted, pivotal partners are not systematically identified,4 and if two or more countries benefit, the activity is reported as regional or global co-operation since the system does not allow for multiple beneficiaries to be reported.
Since 2007, SEGIB, with support from the Ibero-American Program for Strengthening South-South Cooperation (PIFCSS), has been working with a conceptual and methodological framework to register data on South-South and triangular co-operation in Ibero-America. In 2015, a regional online platform was established where countries share data on their South-South and triangular co-operation in and with Ibero-American countries and their partners. It collects information on triangular partners outside the Ibero-American region such as African and Asian countries that act as pivotal and benefitting partners1 and facilitating partners. The 2022-2023 data on triangular co-operation show that 68% of the initiatives reported are concentrated with four partners (in descending order): Spain, Germany, the EU and Japan. The other 32% are spread across about 30 different facilitating partners, among them Belgium, Canada, France, Italy, Korea, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the United States and international organisations (SEGIB, 2024, p. 112[7]).
In the past 15 years, SEGIB gathered information from 1 431 triangular co-operation initiatives involving Ibero-American countries between 2007 and 2023. Figure 2.6, which is based on these data, shows how triangular co-operation in the Ibero-American region has evolved since the beginning of data collection in 2010. Especially noteworthy is the drastic decline in the number of actions, which could be seminars, workshops, training sessions or other actions (SEGIB, 2024[7]) relative to the increase in the number of initiatives with entire project designs. This is a sign of triangular co-operation moving towards a next step of maturity in the region.
Source: SEGIB (2024[7]), Report on South-South and Triangular Cooperation in Ibero-America 2024, https://informesursur.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/informe-final-ingles.pdf; SEGIB (2025, p. 103[6]), Ibero-American cooperation figures (database), https://informesursur.org/en/ibero-american-cooperation-figures/.
Triangular co-operation as a modality has gained more prominence in the exchanges than bilateral South-South and regional co-operation. Another notable finding is that the thematic profile of triangular co-operation, with environmental protection the top concern, differs from that of bilateral exchanges. Analysis of the roles performed by countries also showed that the same country may take on different roles in different initiatives depending on the thematic area and degree of specialisation (SEGIB, 2024[7]).
Note: The Ibero-American framework uses different terminology than this publication to identify the roles of actors in triangular co-operation partnerships: primer oferente (Southern partner), which could be the role of the pivotal; segundo oferente (non-Southern partner), which is the term used to identify the facilitating partner; and recipient to identify beneficiary.
Source: Exchanges with SEGIB and SEGIB (2024[7]), Report on South-South and Triangular Cooperation in Ibero-America 2024, https://informesursur.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/informe-final-ingles.pdf; SEGIB (2025[6]), Ibero-American cooperation figures (database), https://informesursur.org/en/ibero-american-cooperation-figures/.
Size of initiatives. The TOSSD disbursement data suggest that triangular co-operation initiatives are rather small compared to other bilateral technical co-operation initiatives; a key reason being that the financial contributions of the reporting provider are captured in official statistics and not all partners’ efforts are monitored. Because the common comparable measurement in traditional development co-operation has been financial disbursements by the provider (specifically ODA), this has been seen as the default for all modalities. However, provider disbursements do not consider the efforts that many partners, particularly developing countries, are making in terms of sharing their experts' time and knowledge. A change in the way triangular initiatives are tracked is needed. These initiatives may be small in terms of the ODA budgets mobilised, but since different partners contribute different types of resources, the overall volume is higher than what can be captured in official statistics.
Project details. Data on disbursements may inadvertently hide disaggregated information about triangular co-operation projects. Most umbrella programmes, funds and facilities are reported as one line in the CRS and TOSSD – either as a commitment when the initiative is agreed or as a disbursement after the first funding for the initiative is disbursed. While this is in line with reporting practice, it only gives a very partial picture of the triangular partnerships that are being formed under the respective umbrellas. For example, the German Regional Fund for Triangular Cooperation with Partners in LAC is reported in the CRS as one data entry, though the number of initiatives since 2011 has grown to 142 projects with the participation of 39 countries and organisations (see Box 2.4 for an example where all partners contribute resources). The Fund has published its own repository of projects that for each initiative shows all partners engaged, the roles performed by each partner, monetised contributions, sectors, general descriptions, duration and status (GIZ, 2023[16]). The EU’s ADELANTE, another umbrella programme, reported in the CRS as one data entry, actually comprises six dedicated funds and 55 triangular projects that are being implemented in two phases over 2015-2027 (European Commission, 2025[17]). The SEGIB public platform does not offer access to the disaggregated data collected on each project (SEGIB, 2025[6]).
Costa Rica, Germany, Honduras and the Central American Integration System (SICA) worked in a triangular initiative to contribute to the promotion and early development of a national market for electric vehicles, charging infrastructure and related services. The project also aimed to promote regional integration by leveraging experiences from initiatives in Costa Rica and Honduras to create a replicable model for other Central American countries within the SICA framework. All partners decided to budget for or assign in-kind resources to implement the project. All in-kind contributions from partners were monetised in the records of the project. The breakdown was as follows:
Honduras – EUR 540 000
Costa Rica – EUR 322 923
Germany – EUR 300 000
SICA – EUR 120 000.
The collaborative funding from Costa Rica, Honduras, Germany and SICA as a regional organisation is an example of a balanced and joint investment that maximised the ownership, shared responsibility and impact of the project. Results included legal and regulatory frameworks to support electric mobility; procedures for acquiring electric vehicles to electrify public and private transportation fleets, strengthened regional collaboration to harmonise public policies on electric mobility across SICA countries; and programmes and strategies to promote, train, develop and implement electric mobility in Honduras. By pooling resources, partners ensured that the expertise and experiences from multiple countries would be used efficiently, which led to a more sustainable implementation of electric mobility initiatives in the region.
Source: GIZ (2023[16]), Interactive Project Listing (database), https://fondo-cooperacion-triangular.net/en/filter-list-2/. Project details also are drawn from the OECD Academy e-learning module on triangular co-operation accessible through links on the OECD triangular co-operation website at OECD (n.d.[18]), “Triangular Co-operation”, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/development-co-operation-in-practice/triangular-co-operation.html.
Data coverage. The qualitative data and evidence from international processes and discussions show that several governments, international organisations and non-state actors are absent from the datasets. For example, in the SEGIB reporting, Spain is the largest partner of triangular co-operation in the region with participation in 53 projects in 2022-2023 (SEGIB, 2024, p. 34[7]), and yet Spain only appears with two projects in 2022 in the TOSSD reporting. Similarly, Asia, the region in focus for this edition of the report, is significantly under-reported in TOSSD. For example, Japan appears as one of the top four triangular partners in the Ibero-American region, after Spain, Germany and the EU (SEGIB, 2024, p. 112[7]).
This disconnect stems from the fact that the different measurements have different focuses (disbursements versus projects) and different levels of reporting (programme versus project and activities). A common challenge to all frameworks is the difficulty of capturing non-governmental actors or subnational actors. There is a need to continue refining the methodologies to do so.
The growing importance of triangular co-operation in global development over recent decades is increasingly reflected in data frameworks and reporting. Databases have improved in coverage, diversity of sources and methodological clarity. Nevertheless, a closer look at the available evidence shows persistent challenges regarding the regularity, accuracy and completeness of the data and in the relevance of aspects monitored. TOSSD is the most comprehensive global dataset for triangular co-operation disbursements, but reporting is still limited and irregular and provides only a partial picture.
Many reporting entities are making strides in raising awareness within their institutions about triangular co-operation and towards agreement on a common understanding or definition of triangular co-operation. This is leading to improved internal procedures for better generation of data and, consequently, better data submissions. Challenges remain, however, at international, regional and national levels.
For instance, the Ibero-American region has demonstrated the value of regional co-operation in data collection, and its methodological coherence, historical coverage and consistency in data collection have made it a reference beyond the region. However, the limited public access to disaggregated data at the project level poses constraints for analysis and comparability with other datasets.
At the national level, the implementation in Germany of a dedicated marker for triangular co-operation is evidence of the transformative potential of simple data collection innovations (Box 2.5). The marker has significantly improved the accuracy and volume of German reporting on disbursement. The Brazilian COBRADI report is an example of national efforts of Southern providers to document in-kind contributions in reporting on triangular co-operation (Box 2.2). It is crucial that all resources dedicated to a project and contributing to achieving results are accounted for. Ensuring comparability of valuing in-kind contributions remains a challenge. The pilot of the new UN framework may generate insights on this issue.
In 2022, the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) introduced a marker for triangular co-operation in its internal reporting system to facilitate identification of trilateral initiatives in official statistics and improve Germany’s reporting in the CRS and later TOSSD. The goal was to capture all development co-operation projects – whether a small initiative or a global project with a triangular co-operation component – that in practice are implemented through triangular partnerships.
Germany was the first country to report its engagement in triangular co-operation to the CRS, starting in 2016. Before the new marker was introduced, the data already indicated that Germany was one of the leading actors of the modality, but the actual figures pertaining to its triangular co-operation were under-reported. Following the implementation of the marker, Germany’s reported disbursements through triangular co-operation were nearly five times higher, having increased from 15 reported initiatives accounting for less than USD 8 million in 2021 to 51 reported initiatives accounting for more than USD 37 million in 2022 (Figure 2.7).
Disbursement, USD million, in constant 2023 prices
Note: In 2019 (applicable to 2018 data), a change was made to the definition of the CRS bi-multi code for triangular co-operation in the CRS. As a result, while data before 2018 are available for Germany, they are not comparable and have therefore been excluded from this figure.
Source: OECD/IsDB (2023[3]), Global Perspectives on Triangular Co-operation, https://doi.org/10.1787/29e2cbc0-en; GPI on Effective Triangular Co-operation (2023[19]), Implementing BAPA+40 Through Triangular Co-operation: Case Story – Germany, https://triangular-cooperation.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/GPI-Spotlight-Germany-V1.pdf; OECD (2025[20]), CRS: Creditor Reporting System (flows), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/52.
Further analysis and dialogue on how each partner collects data on triangular co-operation could help identify steps to adjust procedures for national data collection and regional and international reporting. A significant blind spot is including information on all partners involved and not just on the reporter and beneficiaries or beneficiary.
A shared aspiration is interoperability between different global and regional databases on triangular co-operation. The FfD4 discussions included calls to promote open, interoperable data platforms and standards to improve data sharing and accessibility and address the challenges for developing countries. Data platforms and standards such as TOSSD, the CRS, SEGIB, the IATI and others thus have a unique opportunity to enhance interoperability, which would decrease the reporting burden and ensure transparency and accountability efforts in the future.
AI tools also hold promise for identifying unreported or unlabelled triangular co-operation projects (Chapter 1). AI could be used to search project documents from partners across the globe and help identify projects that are not yet included in databases or are in databases such as TOSSD and the CRS but not labelled as triangular. AI can also be used to cross-check data and identify reporting issues, which can potentially improve consistency and accuracy. Available TOSSD data include some reported activities that are clearly not triangular in nature, but without cross-checking the data either manually or with the help of technological tools, inaccuracies are bound to continue to occur.
Finally, while more information is needed on the inputs and general description of implemented triangular co-operation initiatives, statistical data will not show the full picture. Information is also needed on how partnerships are formed, what governance structures exist for horizontal decision making, how resources were integrated, what knowledge and practices have been at the core of the knowledge sharing and peer learning, and what results – direct and indirect – emerged from the triangular co-operation. Triangular co-operation actors acknowledged the importance of such information at the 8th International Meeting on Triangular Co-operation in Lisbon, agreeing that a shared challenge is identifying potential partners that have the practices they would like to learn from (PIFCSS, 2024[21]). Platforms with some information exist, but documentation of project experiences and evaluation of triangular co-operation remain insufficient.
Without improvement and adjustment of data collection at the national level, challenges around quality and completeness of data will persist and crucial aspects worth monitoring to capture the nature of the modality at the global level will continue to be missed.
References
[2] Aly, A. (2025), “Australia supports open data and transparency (remarks at the “Data as Dialogue” side event of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development)”, YouTube video, https://www.youtube.com/shorts/4a1W8dWlxCo?feature=share.
[17] European Commission (2025), ADELANTE: Fostering Triangular Cooperation and building partnerships for development in Latin America and the Caribbean, https://international-partnerships.ec.europa.eu/policies/programming/programmes/adelante_en#related-document.
[16] GIZ (2023), Interactive Project Listing (database), Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), Bonn, https://fondo-cooperacion-triangular.net/filter-list-2/?lang=en (accessed on 29 April 2025).
[19] GPI on Effective Triangular Co-operation (2023), Implementing BAPA+40 Through Triangular Co-operation: Case Story - Germany, https://triangular-cooperation.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/GPI-Spotlight-Germany-V1.pdf (accessed on 8 April 2025).
[11] GPI on Effective Triangular Co-operation (2019), Triangular Co-operation in the Era of the 2030 Agenda: Sharing Evidence and Stories From the Field, https://triangular-cooperation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Final-GPI-report-BAPA40.pdf (accessed on 28 April 2025).
[4] International Forum on TOSSD (2024), Annual Report 2024, https://www.tossd.org/content/dam/tossd/en/international-forum-on-tossd/key-documents/VER-FINAL-informe2024-TOSSD.pdf (accessed on 18 April 2025).
[20] OECD (2025), CRS: Creditor Reporting System (flows), http://data-explorer.oecd.org/s/52 (accessed on 8 April 2025).
[10] OECD (2025), Development Finance for Gender Equality (dashboard), https://www.oecd.org/en/data/dashboards/development-finance-for-gender-equality.html (accessed on 17 July 2025).
[8] OECD (2023), Triangular co-operation repository of projects (database), https://web-archive.oecd.org/2019-10-07/420179-triangular-co-operation-repository.htm (accessed on 8 August 2025).
[18] OECD (n.d.), “Triangular Co-operation (webpage)”, Development Co-operation in Practice, https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/sub-issues/development-co-operation-in-practice/triangular-co-operation.html (accessed on 8 August 2025).
[3] OECD/IsDB (2023), Global Perspectives on Triangular Co-operation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/29e2cbc0-en.
[21] PIFCSS (2024), Summary of Discussions: Co-Lab on Strengthening Systems to Engage in Triangular Partnerships, Ibero-American Program for the Strengthening of South-South Cooperation (PIFCSS), Madrid, https://cooperacionsursur.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Summary-of-Discussion-Co-Lab-on-Strengthening-Systems-to-Engage-in-Triangular-Partnerships.pdf (accessed on 8 August 2025).
[13] PIFCSS (2016), “Valorización de la cooperación Sur-Sur Estudios de Caso: Brasil, Chile y México [Monetisation of South-South Co-operation Case Studies: Brazil, Chile and Mexico]”, Working Paper, No. 10, Ibero-American Program for the Strengthening of South-South Cooperation (PIFCSS), Madrid, https://www.cooperacionsursur.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/11-DT10.pdf.
[12] PIFCSS (2016), “Valorización de la cooperación Sur-Sur: Avances y retos en Iberoamérica [Monetisation of South-South Cooperation: Progress and challenges in Ibero-America]”, Working Paper, No. 9, Ibero-American Program for the Strengthening of South-South Cooperation (PIFCSS), Madrid, https://www.cooperacionsursur.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/12-DT09.pdf.
[15] Schleicher, R. and P. Barros (2022), “Medindo o gasto externo brasileiro para a implementação da Agenda 2030: o novo COBRADI 2021-2024 [Measuring Brazil’s external expenditure for the implementation of 2030 Agenda: The new COBRADI 2021-2024]”, Boletim de Economia e Política Internacional 33, https://doi.org/10.38116/bepi33art5.
[6] SEGIB (2025), Ibero-American cooperation figures (database), Ibero-American General Secretariat (SEGIB), Madrid, https://informesursur.org/en/ibero-american-cooperation-figures/ (accessed on 15 April 2025).
[7] SEGIB (2024), Report on South-South and Triangular Cooperation in Ibero-America 2024, Ibero-American General Secretariat (SEGIB), Madrid, https://informesursur.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/informe-final-ingles.pdf.
[9] TOSSD (2025), Data Visualisation Tool (database), https://tossd.online/ (accessed on 5 August 2025).
[14] TOSSD (2025), TOSSD Reporting Instructions 2025, https://tossd.org/docs/reporting_instructions.pdf (accessed on 28 April 2025).
[1] UN (2025), “A/CONF.227/2025/L.1”, in Sevilla Commitment (adopted at the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development held in Sevilla, Spain, 30 June to 3 July 2025), United Nations, New York, https://docs.un.org/A/CONF.227/2025/L.1 (accessed on 8 August 2025).
[5] UNCTAD (2025), Manual for the Framework to Measure South-South Cooperation: Technical and Procedural Aspects for Pilot Testing, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Geneva, https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/tcsstatinf2025d1_en.pdf (accessed on 16 April 2025).
← 1. The OECD online project repository includes information on triangular co-operation projects that countries, international organisations, representatives of the private sector, civil society, philanthropy and subnational actors share with the OECD. The database is being progressively expanded and was last updated in January 2023. The database can be searched by the actors involved (e.g. countries, international organisations and other non-governmental actors) as well as by sector, budget range, start date and whether costs are or are not shared. Updates after January 2023 were not possible, and the database is now available on the OECD web archive: https://web-archive.oecd.org/2019-10-07/420179-triangular-co-operation-repository.htm.
← 2. Unless otherwise indicated, this report categorises regions as follows: Africa (Africa and South of Sahara in TOSSD); Asia-Pacific (Asia, Far East Asia, Oceania, and South and Central Asia in TOSSD); Europe; LAC (America, Caribbean and Central America and South America in TOSSD), and MENA (Middle East and North of Sahara in TOSSD).
← 3. In 2022 and 2023, 19% of reported activities did not specify the beneficiary country or region.
← 4. Regular reporting on pivotal partners will start in the 2025 data collection round on 2024 activities.