Development-bank tenders: which bank pays can decide who may bid

Whether a firm may bid at all can depend on which development bank pays for the project. A World Bank loan lets eligible firms from any country compete, and, apart from listed exceptions, the borrower may not turn one away for reasons unrelated to its capability and resources or to a conflict of interest. The Asian Development Bank lets bidders from its eligible members compete, and its ordinary capital resources pay, unless its Board decides otherwise, only for goods, works and services produced in and supplied from its members. The African Development Bank’s own lending is open only to firms incorporated in, national of and based in a member country.^{1, 3, 7, 8}

The paying bank also shapes the price comparison. Under World Bank rules a borrower may add 15% to the price of imported goods when comparing them with goods made in its own country with at least 30% local content. It may never do so for Plant, the World Bank’s term for the provision of equipped facilities, such as those delivered on a design, supply, installation and commissioning basis. The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) provides for no margin at all in its newest rules.^{1, 4, 14}

And it decides what happens after the award. Only the World Bank’s own rules fix the length of a standstill: 10 business days in which a losing bidder can decide whether to complain, longer if a late debriefing extends them. Only the EBRD gives a bidder deadlines of its own for taking an issue to the bank itself, tied to its own dealings with the client and the bank.

So the first thing to read in a development-bank tender is the financing line: which bank, which of its funds, and which edition of its rules. The World Bank, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the EBRD have all issued new ones since September 2025.^{1, 2, 3, 4}

At ADB and the African Development Bank (AfDB), the restrictions follow the money. Unless its Board decides otherwise, the test for its ordinary capital resources also covers the funds ADB administers, and its Special Funds pay only for goods, works and services from members that contributed to them or from developing member countries. The AfDB applies its country-of-origin test when it lends its own money or the Nigeria Trust Fund’s; under the African Development Fund, firms from any country may bid.^{3, 7, 8}

The AfDB’s test looks at the firm: where it is incorporated, its nationality and its principal place of business. A firm from a non-member country is not eligible even if it offers from a member country. An unincorporated joint venture is eligible if members that pass the test carry out more than 50% of the value of its works or services.^{7, 8} A group bidding through a local subsidiary or a partnership therefore has to settle which entity bids before it prices anything.

The other three banks are open by default. The World Bank lists its exceptions, among them a legal ban by the borrower’s country on commercial relations with the bidder’s country, an exclusion that complies with a decision of the UN Security Council, and a sanction under the Bank’s Anti-Corruption Guidelines. The EBRD places no restriction on firms from any country, member of the Bank or not. For projects inside and outside the EU financed from its own resources, the European Investment Bank (EIB) admits firms from all countries; where financing outside the EU comes from third parties, their rules apply and may partly restrict who can bid.^{1, 4, 5, 9}

The EBRD’s rules of 1 September 2026 add grounds for exclusion. In a public sector operation the client must, subject to the Bank’s no-objection, reject a bidder where it, a member of its joint venture or any of their affiliates faces credible allegations of forced labour, child labour or human rights violations. The allegations must be backed by court judgments or by reports of intergovernmental or recognised human rights organisations. The 2022 rules had no such ground. For sanctions over prohibited practices, the look-back is shorter, five years instead of ten, but a final administrative fine now counts as well as a criminal conviction. The new rules apply only to operations that receive concept approval after 1 September 2026; earlier operations keep the 2022 rules unless the client and the Bank expressly agree otherwise.^{4, 5}

The World Bank’s margin of domestic preference is an evaluation adjustment: it is added to the price of imported goods, or to foreign firms’ prices on works, only for comparing bids. It keeps no one out, but it can decide who wins. It is the borrower’s option, available only in open international competitive procurement for goods or works, agreed in the procurement plan and set out in the request for bids.¹

For goods the margin is 15%, and locally made goods qualify only if local labour, raw material and components make up 30% or more of their ex-works price and the production facility has been making such goods at least since bid submission. On works, the margin is 7.5% on foreign firms’ prices, and only in member countries below a per capita income threshold that the Bank sets each year. Neither margin applies to Plant, so for a foreign manufacturer the same equipment can face the 15% margin when a borrower buys it as goods, and none when it goes into a substation let as one design, supply, installation and commissioning contract, the kind of contract the Bank’s definition of Plant gives as its example.¹

An EIB borrower outside the EU, except in candidate countries, may also grant a 15% margin for goods with at least 30% local content ex-factory, but never for works, even works that include the supply of goods, or for local services.⁹ At both banks the form of the contract decides whether a margin can apply at all.

The AfDB may, under special circumstances and conditions, consider accepting the domestic and regional preference margins in a member country’s own procurement regulations, after reviewing them against its policy principles. Its manual suggests ceilings, but its wording for goods points both ways: “not exceeding 15%, but in any case, not exceeding the customs duties” on such imports, then “whichever is higher (yet still below 15%)”, so it leaves open whether the duties lower the ceiling.^{7, 8}

The World Bank’s seventh edition added a local labour rule. Unless the Bank agrees otherwise, on internationally procured works contracts where its standard documents must be used, bidders must give at least a set share of total labour cost to local staff; the Bank fixes the share in those documents.^{1, 13} ADB sets its rule on headcount: unless it approves otherwise in writing, at least half of the contracted labour force on internationally advertised works contracts must come from within the borrower’s territory.³

ADB also makes merit-point scoring compulsory in open competitive bidding advertised internationally, for goods and nonconsulting services as well as works, with minimum technical weightings that rise with procurement risk: 10% or 20% where it is moderate or low, 50% or 60% where it is high or substantial, depending on the contract’s value. Those merit points may not reward only the origin of goods, equipment or materials, or the nationality of a bidder’s joint-venture partners, subcontractors or suppliers.³ Both labour rules are written for works, so an equipment supply contract let as goods is outside them; ADB’s scoring rule is not, and where procurement risk is high or substantial it gives technical merit at least half the weight.

At the World Bank the standstill period starts when the borrower sends its notification of intention to award and lasts 10 business days, counted in the borrower’s official working days, unless a late debriefing extends it; the contract may not be awarded before or during it. None is required where only one bid came in through an open competitive process, for direct selection, for call-offs under framework agreements, or in emergencies the Bank recognises.¹

None of the other four sets its length in its own rules. ADB puts the details of any standstill in the bidding documents; the AfDB puts the agreed period in the procurement plan and financing agreement, and its manual’s typical 10 business days, where notices go out electronically, are only indicative good practice.^{3, 8} Outside the EU, the EIB asks for a reasonable period before signing without setting its length; inside the EU, national law implementing the EU procurement directives applies.⁹

At the World Bank, on contracts where its standard documents must be used, complaints go to the borrower in writing. One about the bidding documents should arrive at least 10 business days before the bid deadline, or within 5 business days after amended terms are issued, whichever is later. One about the intended award is made within the standstill period and answered within 15 business days, and the borrower does not proceed until it has properly addressed it.¹ A late addendum therefore gives a bidder a fresh, short window to challenge the documents.

At ADB the borrower reviews complaints and, beyond acknowledging receipt, ADB generally does not communicate directly with the complainant until the award is published.³ Under the AfDB’s framework, complaints go to the borrower first, and may go to the Bank if the borrower does not respond promptly; to be admissible, they must be filed within the standstill period or, where there is none, before the contract is signed.¹⁵

At the EIB, a complaint about the promoter goes to the promoter or the relevant review bodies, normally national ones, and one about the Bank’s own action to its Procurement Complaints Committee. A complaint received after the Bank’s non-objection and during the standstill suspends that non-objection, and the Bank decides within 30 calendar days, or up to 60 in complex cases; once the standstill has expired, the process can no longer be redressed.⁹

The EBRD expects a bidder to try the client first, through a request for clarification or a debriefing. Until its proposal is opened (the financial proposal in a two-envelope process, the final proposal in a multistage one), it can ask the Bank for a procurement review, but only after one of those requests: no later than 7 days before the submission deadline if it asked for clarification, or within 7 days after its debriefing, the client’s explicit rejection of its debriefing request, or its submission of a debriefing request that the client does not answer within the time the procurement documents allow. Once the proposal is opened, the route is a complaint to the Bank, within 7 days after the same three events. A bidder that receives an unsatisfactory answer to a review request has 7 days to complain; if it misses them, it waives its right to complain about the same issue later in the process. The days are calendar days, and a deadline ending on a weekend or public holiday in the client’s country runs to the next working day only if the bidder told the Bank before the original deadline.^{4, 14} We read that third event cautiously: as worded, it ties the 7 days to the bidder’s own request, so a bidder whose request goes unanswered is safest counting from the day it asked rather than waiting for the client’s time to run out.

Source: each bank’s own regulations, directive, policy, manual or guide, at the sections listed for it in the sources below.^{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15}

At the World Bank, a bidder’s rights and obligations come from the request for bids and the contracts, not from the Regulations or the legal agreement between the borrower and the Bank; at ADB, they come from the bidding document and the contracts. The World Bank’s seventh edition is dated September 2025, but neither it nor the Bank’s procurement framework page says from which date it applies.^{1, 2, 3} The request for bids is therefore where a bidder should look for the edition.

ZESCO’s request for bids for Package 4 in Zambia, issued on 11 May 2026, was an international request for bids under the World Bank’s seventh edition, open to all eligible bidders. After five addenda, its bids were due on 25 September 2026 (see our field note on that tender).^{11, 12}

At ADB, references to the 2017 Procurement Regulations in its documents, including those of ADB-financed projects, now refer to the Directive, in force since 1 January 2026.³ An old title can therefore carry new rules at ADB, while an older EBRD operation keeps the old rules by default.

ListingMinds, “Development-bank tenders: which bank pays can decide who may bid”, 23 October 2026. https://www.listingminds.com/energy/field-notes/development-bank-procurement-rules