Private Finance Mobilisation Report 2026

Executive summary

Key findings

Between 2012 and 2024, official development finance interventions mobilised more than USD 600 billion in private resources, primarily through guarantees (30%), direct investment in companies (25%) and syndicated loans (16%), underscoring the central role of risk-sharing and market-participation instruments in crowding in private capital.

To capture the most recent trends in private finance mobilisation, this report focuses on the period 2021-2024. During this time frame, mobilised private finance displayed a gradual upward trend, peaking at USD 77 billion in 2024. Nevertheless, mobilisation levels remain insufficient relative to projected development needs and to seize available investment opportunities.

• Regional distribution. Africa accounted for 30% of total mobilised private finance or an average of USD 19.7 billion per year, making it the largest beneficiary region. Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) ranked second, with 28% of the total (USD 18 billion on average per year). At the country level, Brazil and India emerged as the main recipients, benefiting from approximately USD 6.5 billion and USD 5.7 billion, respectively, of mobilised private finance per year.

• Risk profile concentration. Mobilisation remained concentrated in markets perceived as less risky, with middle-income but not least developed countries (LDCs) receiving nearly 70% of all mobilised finance. In contrast, only 8% reached low-income countries (LICs), highlighting persistent structural barriers to directing private capital to the most fragile contexts.

• Sectoral trends. Economic infrastructure and business‑related activities attracted 70% of mobilised private finance, while social sectors accounted for just 6%, reflecting ongoing challenges in mobilising private investment at scale in education, health and other social sectors.

• Mobilised private finance for climate. About 40% of mobilised private finance (USD 26.2 billion per year) supported climate action. Of this amount, nearly 70% focused on mitigation, 22% addressed both mitigation and adaptation, and only 8% focused exclusively on adaptation despite significant and rising adaptation needs in vulnerable countries.

• Main actors. Multilateral development banks (MDBs) remained the dominant mobilisers, accounting for 71% of total mobilised private finance. At the same time, bilateral providers played a meaningful complementary role, led by the United States (USD 6.5 billion per year on average) and followed by France and the United Kingdom (USD 2.1 billion each), largely through the operations of their respective DFIs.

Recent policy discussions at the Fourth Financing for Development Conference (FFD4) emphasised the need to scale up private finance mobilisation through mechanisms such as joint guarantee programmes, blended finance facilities and thematic bond issuances. These approaches aim to move beyond single‑instrument approaches to achieve greater scale and efficiency.

Looking ahead, ongoing analytical work is assessing the feasibility of capturing additional approaches used by development finance providers to mobilise private investment such as catalytic interventions and balance-sheet optimisation (including originate-to-distribute or generation approaches). While statistics on mobilisation will continue to provide a unique source of comprehensive and comparable data series, expanding measurement frameworks could provide a more complete picture of how public development finance supports private capital at scale.

Key recommendations

• Development finance providers should further strengthen the comprehensiveness, consistency and transparency of data on mobilised private finance for sustainable development. Improving the quality and granularity of reporting can help build investor confidence, reduce information asymmetries, and narrow the gap between real and perceived investment risks in developing countries, particularly in higher‑risk contexts.

• Policymakers are encouraged to collectively uphold the highest international standards of transparency and disclosure and to support continued collaboration across institutions to further align data and methodological approaches for tracking mobilisation. Such efforts would help strengthen overall data coherence and comparability. With time series available since 2012, OECD data on mobilised private finance continue to provide an important evidence base for policymakers and private investors alike. Further progress in this area that builds on ongoing work to enhance measurement and reporting – particularly efforts to capture a broader range of mobilisation approaches, such as catalytic instruments and balance‑sheet optimisation activities, and to expand access to more disaggregated data –would reinforce the robustness and usability of mobilised finance information.

• Development finance providers should promote greater standardisation of blended finance instruments to enhance transparency, accessibility and replicability across markets. Standardisation can help reduce transaction costs, limit information asymmetries and facilitate scaling by easing due diligence and structuring processes for private investors. In this regard, country platforms and other multi‑stakeholder co-ordination mechanisms can serve as important enabling conditions to align public and private actors, pool expertise, and mobilise private finance at scale.