Abstract Motivation Cross‐border cooperation remains a critical challenge for sustainable development in regions marked by historical rivalries, geopolitical asymmetries, and socioenvironmental vulnerabilities. The Itaipu Binacional Hydroelectric Plant, jointly governed by Brazil and Paraguay, offers a unique case for examining how shared governance can transform potential conflict into coordinated development in South America. Purpose This study investigates how the institutional design and historical evolution of Itaipu Binacional enabled regional cooperation and development between Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina. The research addresses the following question: how did shared governance in the context of Itaipu Binacional contribute to facilitating regional cooperation and promoting development between Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina? Approach and Methods The analysis combines a historical descriptive approach with a critical institutional and legal review. The study draws on international treaties, national legislation, internal statutes, and empirical data published by Itaipu Binacional. The literature on hydrodiplomacy, regional integration, and consensual hydro‐hegemony frames the theoretical discussion. Findings The findings suggest that Itaipu Binacional has served as a functional model of shared governance, facilitating energy integration, political rapprochement, and the creation of institutional mechanisms for cross‐country cooperation. However, the project also exposed issues associated with unequal distribution of economic benefits, legal asymmetries, and the displacement of local communities—especially affecting the Guarani people. Although Brazil exercised hegemonic influence, it did so through a framework of negotiated parity, reinforcing the relevance of consensual hydro‐hegemony as an analytical lens. Policy Implications The Itaipu experience underscores the potential of shared governance to promote development and prevent conflict in the Global South. Future infrastructure projects should incorporate inclusive governance models, equitable benefit‐sharing mechanisms, and robust environmental safeguards. Institutional innovation, transparency, and participatory frameworks are essential to ensure that regional cooperation is effective and just.

Abstract Motivation In recent years, foreign aid donors have tried to become more transparent, often by sharing information digitally. However, the politicization of individual aid projects has resulted in biased reporting, raising doubts about the legitimacy of aid in general. We therefore examine whether increased transparency leads to greater government effectiveness and public trust. Purpose Government agencies typically assume that greater transparency in public administration improves understanding of bureaucratic actions, thereby fostering trust in the government. In foreign aid, openness is believed to enhance public confidence and improve the effectiveness of governments. However, recent public and political reactions to the disclosure of aid information cast doubt on these optimistic assumptions. Approach and methods Using our sender‐mediator‐receiver model of a “fragile transparency loop,” we analyse how communication breaks down in German foreign aid. First, we focus on Germany as a donor that shares information through a digital transparency portal, examining the sender side. Second, we investigate the mediator side by conducting a qualitative content analysis of German online media articles. Third, we examine the receiver side by disaggregating the German public into several subgroups. Findings Our empirical findings suggest that, while donors assume a virtuous transparency loop, the reality can resemble a fragile transparency loop that is easily disrupted. The government may withhold information; mediators may spread misinformation; and the public may not receive information neutrally. These dynamics explain why, despite increasing transparency, donors may not achieve the intended increases in government effectiveness and public trust. Policy implications Donors should find a balanced approach to foreign aid transparency that upholds democratic accountability while avoiding information overload. Aid bureaucracies should tailor their disclosure to serve different audiences, including professionals with development expertise and the wider public, who may have preconceptions or be uninformed about foreign aid.

Abstract MotivationForest tenure security plays a critical role in improving the livelihoods of those who live in and around forests and simultaneously contribute to forest conservation. Governments around the world have tried to strengthen tenure through titling programmes. Little is known about how forest titling contributes in practice to tenure security and how it affects local investment in forest management.PurposeThis research aims to understand the legal, practical, and perceptual dimensions of forest tenure (in)security after the titling programme; and to examine causal paths from tenure (in)security to local investment in forest management.Approach and methodsTaking Southwest China as an example, the article uses mixed methods to integrate qualitative and quantitative perspectives. Quantitative data were collected using a standardized questionnaire from 410 selected households. Qualitative data were gathered through in‐depth interviews with 45 key informants, including forest officials, village heads, elders, women, and local forest rangers. Nine focus group interviews were set up to learn about local perspectives on collective forest tenure reform and perceived tenure (in)security.FindingsAlthough legal tenure security has been improved by forest titling, both practical and perceived tenure insecurity continue to exist.Titling in the three sites varied between collective and individual titles, and by the degree to which either category had been certified. Context played a crucial role; for example, areas where farmers had planted rubber trees were more likely to have individual titles. In some cases, forest lands remained under dispute and were not certified.Although legal tenure security has been improved by forest titling, in practice, rights to harvest timber and other forest products were restricted by regulations that undermined tenure security. Again, the degree of restriction varies according to local context.Tenure insecurity also arose from the uncertainty of the duration of rights holding, as legal durations and local perceptions of duration diverged.Tenure security did not necessarily encourage investment in the management of forests; local context mattered more than tenure.Policy implicationsCentral government needs to pay more attention to local variation to understand practical and perceived tenure security. Decentralization to empower local decision‐making can help. Central government should also consider removal of the timber quotas to improve tenure security and stimulate local forest management. Additionally, the government and the international community should investigate the multidimensionality of forest tenure security, considering both local biophysical and socioeconomic conditions.

Abstract MotivationThe Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development has provided a once‐in‐a‐decade opportunity for the international community to take stock of both progress in and challenges to financing Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Although the Addis Ababa Action Agenda has called for a transformative, comprehensive and holistic approach to implementing SDGs, the international development financing system are falling short of expectations. It is high time to reform the international development financing system to fit for purpose.PurposeThe present paper aims to answer why it is important to foster structural transformation as a key engine for achieving SDGs, what limitations that the existing international development financing system suffer from, and how to rejuvenate the spirit of public entrepreneurship to promote structural transformation.Approach and methodsFirst, it takes a historical approach to understand the imperative for achieving structural transformation. Second, it uses the case analysis of infrastructure financing to diagnose the limitations of the international development financing system. Third, it provides a framework for reforming the international development financing system.FindingsAchieving structural transformation in a sustainable and inclusive manner is a powerful engine for both alleviating poverty and tackling global challenges. Yet, the international development financing system has failed to foster long‐run structural transformation due to its inclination to search for ready‐made solutions to complex structural challenges and its focus on short‐term performance targets and deteriorating fragmentation.Policy implicationsAt the strategy level, the international development cooperation system should rejuvenate the spirit of public entrepreneurship in pursuit of structural transformation in a sustainable, equitable and resilient manner. At the operational level, development cooperation agencies should go beyond the current ‘from billions to trillions’ agenda to advance transformational scaling. At the level of international rules, it should create enabling conditions for development finance providers to provide large‐scale, long‐term and high‐risk capital while safeguarding financial soundness and stability.

Abstract MotivationThe transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy is crucial to address climate change and achieving sustainable development, particularly for low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs). The Paris Agreement underscored the importance of involving LMICs in global greenhouse gas reduction efforts, thus amplifying the relevance of renewable energy development in these regions.PurposeThis study evaluates the effectiveness of financial incentive policies in enhancing official development assistance for renewable energy development in LMICs. It also provides strategies for beneficiaries to select efficient financial incentive policies.Methods and approachThe study uses panel regression analysis to assess the effectiveness of the financial incentive policies in the relationship between official development assistance for renewable energy development and renewable electricity generation. Using renewable electricity generation as the performance indicator, the article examines the effectiveness of individual financial incentive policies. The data span 2010 to 2019 for 79 LMICs, including the post‐Paris agreement period.FindingsThe findings indicate that feed‐in tariffs and loans positively moderate the relationship between official development assistance for renewable energy development and renewable electricity generation. Feed‐in tariffs seem to have a long‐term effect due to their policy design, and loans emerge as a significant moderator influenced by the technological maturation and transformative changes in international climate policy.Policy ImplicationsThe results suggest that official development assistance for renewable energy development beneficiaries should prioritize feed‐in tariffs and loans. Feed‐in tariffs offer consistent risk reduction and market access, while loans are most effective when institutional and technological conditions enable large‐scale investment. Donors should promote feed‐in tariffs for sustained stakeholder participation and loans for capital mobilization.

Abstract MotivationThe concept of co‐production has gained currency in development policy as an approach for collaboration and/or stakeholder participation to improve development outcomes. Co‐production implies bringing together different knowledges to create something new, acknowledging that knowledge is both plural and partial; there are multiple ways of knowing and no one way represents truth. Yet existing literature on co‐production tends to focus mostly on strategies for engagement rather than reckoning with structural forces and practical problems to realizing co‐production.PurposeThis article asks how the implementation of the co‐production concept can account for relations of power. It develops a conceptual framework and practical guidance for co‐producing knowledge for development.Approach and MethodsThe study provides an overview of the theory and practice of co‐production and assesses its use in existing development policy. It draws on insights from political ecology literature to construct a conceptual framework and set of practical strategies for implementing co‐production.FindingsThis article advances an approach to the co‐production of knowledge that integrates political economy, reflexivity, and participatory methodologies to guide collaboration. This approach accounts for historical marginalization and unequal power relations to guide development interventions and/or policy.Policy ImplicationsThe article warns against uncritical adoption of co‐production and highlights practical measures to examine power relations in order to understand challenges and enact equitable sustainable development in diverse settings.

Abstract MotivationTourist attractions are key to the development of tourism, yet the process of tourism valorization—transforming resources like natural and cultural heritage or historical discoveries into attractions—remains relatively under‐researched. In the phase of assessing the suitability and potential of these resources for tourism valorization, usually only experts and the tourism industry are involved, neglecting the views of key stakeholders: tourists and locals.PurposeThe main purpose of the research is to identify the indicators that determine the potential/suitability of resources to become tourist attractions and to assess the weight that each indicator has in the eyes of tourists and locals. Furthermore, we examine whether there are significant differences between tourists and locals in this respect that deserve special attention.Approach and methodsA set of indicators was compiled to assess the suitability of resources from previous research on tourism valorization. Surveys were carried out among tourists and locals in Piran, the most popular Slovenian tourist municipality, and the weights assigned to the indicators were compared between the two groups.FindingsAuthenticity, accessibility, uniqueness, and preservation were identified as the most important indicators for assessing the potential/suitability of resources to be developed into attractions. The “Relevance to the community” indicator was identified as the most problematic, as tourists and locals attribute quite different importance to it, which can lead to conflicts in tourism development. In addition to the differences between stakeholders, some distinctions were also identified between the subsamples of each group.Policy implicationsPolicy‐makers should devote more time and energy to involving and empowering the local population in the process of resource valorization. Inclusive destination management can contribute significantly to the quality of the tourism experience and thus to the competitiveness of the destination, as well as to a positive attitude of the local population towards tourism. The importance of authenticity suggests that the destination should be more inclusive of the hinterland, which has retained a high degree of authenticity. This would also alleviate current congestion in the overcrowded areas of the destination and diversify the offer.

Abstract MotivationThe proxy means test (PMT) has become the predominant targeting mechanism for social assistance schemes in many low‐ and lower‐middle income countries, including Jamaica. It has many powerful advocates amid claims that it can accurately and cost‐effectively target the poor. However, recently, there have been concerns expressed by beneficiary groups, government stakeholders, and civil society on the selection of households for benefits under Jamaica's Programme of Advancement Through Health and Education (PATH).PurposeAn evaluation of PATH suggests that it covers only about 71% of households ranked in the poorest quintiles, while 23% of programme beneficiaries are from households considered to be non‐poor (ranked in the top two quintiles). This study introduces innovations to the current PMT model with the objective of improving targeting of the poor for social protection benefits.Approach and methodsWe draw on data collected by the Statistical Institute of Jamaica (STATIN) regarding the PATH programme to show that an application of the poverty‐weighted least squares regression estimation method improves coverage of households ranked in the poorest quintiles. Poverty‐weighted least squares places higher weights on the squared errors of poor households, which avoids the tendency of least squares regression to increase the predicted consumption of the poor.FindingsUsing data compiled by the STATIN through the annual Jamaica Survey of Living Conditions, we showed that the construction of a national model estimated using poverty‐weighted least squares, and adjusting predicted consumption to the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval, improves coverage of the poorest households from 71% to over 85%. Achieving this high rate of coverage among the poor came at a cost, in the form of high coverage among the non‐poor and, particularly, an increase in inclusion errors.Policy implicationsWe believe these results demonstrate that in certain contexts it is possible to improve upon the Basic PMT model and meet the goals the PMT was intended to achieve, efficiently directing social assistance to the poor, minimizing leakage to the non‐poor, and maintaining integrity in the overall social assistance mechanism.