Research and evaluation on the development impact of credit infrastructure reforms

SELECTION OF CONSULTING FIRMS BY THE WORLD BANK GROUP REQUEST FOR EXPRESSION OF INTEREST (EOI) Electronic Submissions through WBGeProcure RFx Now ASSIGNMENT OVERVIEW

Assignment Title: Research and evaluation on the development impact of credit infrastructure reforms

Assignment Countries:

- Not Country Related ASSIGNMENT DESCRIPTION I. CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND 1.1 About The WorldBank Group The World Bank Group works to create a world free of povertyon a livable planet through a combination of financing, knowledge, andexpertise. It consists of the World Bank, including the International Bank forReconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International DevelopmentAssociation (IDA); the International Finance Corporation (IFC); theMultilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA); and the International Centrefor Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). For more information, please visit www.worldbank.org , ida.worldbank.org/en/home ,www.miga.org, www.ifc.org , and www.icsid.worldbank.org . 1.2 About SECO SECO is the federalgovernment's centre of excellence for all core issues relating to economic andlabour market policy. SECO’s aim is to contribute to sustained economic growth,high employment and fair working conditions, by creating the necessaryregulatory, economic and foreign policy framework. 1.3 About GFIP 2.0 Phase 2 of theGlobal Financial Infrastructure Program (GFIP 2) is a 6-year SECO 1 -supportedglobal program aimed at delivering tailored financial infrastructurereforms to promote access to finance to under-served individualsand micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs). GFIP 2 focuses on threekey areas: 1. Creditinformation systems: Assist governments and other stakeholders in establishingand/or reforming their credit reporting systems to enable the flow of reliablecredit-related information in a safe and efficient manner. 2. Securedtransactions and asset-based lending: Develop flexible and innovative creditproducts to increase lending to SMEs using movables as collateral. 3. Insolvency anddebt resolution: Design tailor-made reforms of existing insolvency frameworks,as well as out-of-court restructuring solutions (a particularly important toolin times of systemic crises). GFIP 2 has a global knowledge managementcomponent and a regional focus with country-level projects. 1.4 Background to theAssignment Access to credit for individualsand businesses remains severely constrained across much of the developingworld. Weak legal and institutional frameworks for lending and debt resolution— combined with the absence of reliable credit information, limited ability toleverage productive assets, and low predictability for lenders — create afinancial environment that is particularly unfavorable for micro, small, andmedium-sized enterprises (MSMEs). These constraints reinforce cycles of lowinvestment, limited employment growth, and exclusion from formal financialsystems, disproportionately affecting women-owned businesses and firms inlower-income markets. Since July 2016, with SECOsupport, IFC has rolled out the Global Financial Infrastructure Program (GFIP)across multiple regions. Through this program, IFC supported partner countriesto develop credit reporting and secured transactions systems, as well asinsolvency and debt resolution reforms, contributing to greater financialstability and inclusion and to expanded financial access for female- andmale-owned MSMEs. One of SECO’s key requirementshas been to develop a rigorous methodology to measure the development impact ofcredit infrastructure reforms — going beyond headline output metrics such asthe value of financing facilitated and the number of MSMEs reached.Specifically, SECO and IFC wish to understand whether and to what extent twocritical dimensions of credit infrastructure reform translate into measurableimprovements in firms’ access to finance: (i) credit information systems (CIS)— particularly credit bureaus and credit registries and (ii) movable collateralregistries and secured transactions reforms. This assignment will address bothreform dimensions through two components within a single research study sharinga common methodological framework. The commissioned research builds on a well-establishedevidence based on credit infrastructure and firms’ access to finance, includingprior cross-country studies by IFC and World Bank researchers using EnterpriseSurvey data (e.g., Love, Martínez Pería, and Singh, 2013 and 2016) thatdocumented significant effects of credit bureau and movable collateral registryintroduction on firm-level credit access. However, the data landscape hasevolved substantially since these studies were undertaken, and new econometricmethods have become the methodological standard in applied economics. Anupdated, extended, and methodologically refreshed study across both reformdimensions is therefore both timely and highly relevant to SECO and to IFC’soperational programs. II. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES This assignment examines the development impact of creditinfrastructure reform on firms’ access to finance and firms’ ability to createnew jobs. Credit infrastructure reform is understood broadly to encompass therange of legal, institutional, and informational improvements that shape thefunctioning of credit markets — including the introduction and strengthening ofcredit bureaus and credit registries, the establishment of movable collateralregistries, and reforms to secured transactions. The assignment will producetwo complementary research papers sharing a common methodological approach, onefocused on credit information reforms and one on secured transactions reforms,together providing a comprehensive empirical assessment of how creditinfrastructure reform affects firm financing outcomes. 2.1 Overall Research Objective The overall research objective is to estimate the causal effectof credit infrastructure reforms on firms’ access to finance, using suitablecross-country quasi-experimental designs. The study will also examine thepotential implications of the estimated access-to-finance effects foremployment and other development outcomes, drawing on relevant empiricalliterature. For this assignment, credit infrastructure reforms comprise: (i)credit bureau introduction and improvement; and (ii) movable collateralregistry introduction and secured transaction law reform. 2.2 Research Objectives

• Estimate the average cross-country causal effectof credit infrastructure reforms – encompassing credit bureau introduction andimprovement as well as movable collateral registry establishment and securedtransaction law reforms - on firms’ access to finance, using panel datasets spanningmultiple countries and years with staggered difference-in-differencesidentification.
• Examine heterogeneous treatment effects acrossfirm size (micro, small, medium), age (young vs. established firms), sector,and gender of ownership, to identify which categories of firms benefit mostfrom credit infrastructure reforms — and to generate actionable insights forprogram design.
• Develop an additional synthesis thatuses the estimated effects on firm-level access to finance, together withexisting empirical literature on the relationship between access to finance andbroader development outcomes, to provide indicative illustrative extrapolations,order-of-magnitude estimates of potential implications for variables such asfirm growth, investment, employment, productivity, and financial inclusion.

2.3 Research Questions

• What is the average cross-country effect ofcredit infrastructure reforms on firms’ probability of having a bank loan andthe share of investment financed externally?
• Do the effects of credit infrastructure reformdiffer by firm size, age, sector, and/or gender of ownership – if yes, to whatextent?
• What are the distributional patterns consistentacross reform types – if any?
• Do the effects of credit infrastructure reformin countries with weaker baseline financial sector development differ – if yes,to what extent?
• Do GFIP 2.0 country contexts exhibit distinctdynamics – if yes, to what extent?
• What indicative development implications can beinferred from the estimated access-to-finance effects, drawing on existingliterature on the relationship between financial access and broader economicoutcomes? These extrapolations should beclearly distinguished from the causal estimates produced by the empiricalanalysis.

III. SCOPEOF WORK

• Develop and apply a common methodologicalframework for two research components: (i) credit reporting system reforms,covering credit bureau and credit registry and (ii) movable collateral registryand secured transactions reforms, including collateral registry development. Likethe previously mentioned reference papers, the study should be global incoverage, focused on emerging markets and developing economies. Adapting thedesign as needed to reflect differences in reform identification and dataavailability.
• Construct cross-country panel datasets combiningfirm-level, reform-level, and macro-financial indicators to analyze the effectsof credit infrastructure reforms on firm access to finance. Where data permits,distinguish the effects of legal and regulatory reforms from those of system orregistry development.
• Implement the baseline econometric strategyusing staggered difference-in-differences and two-way fixed effects models tocompare firms in reforming countries with firms in non-reforming countriesbefore and after reform introduction, with country and year fixed effects andstandard errors clustered at the country level.
• Assess and apply advanced estimators appropriatefor staggered treatment timing and heterogeneous treatment effects, includingthe Callaway and Sant’Anna (2021) approach and the Sun and Abraham (2021)interaction-weighted estimator, alongside the baseline specification.
• Produce event-study analysis to test theplausibility of parallel trends and to examine the timing and persistence ofreform effects around the introduction of each reform.
• Conduct heterogeneity analysis to estimatedifferential reform effects by firm size, firm age, sector, gender ofownership/management, level of registry digitalization, intensity of IFCinvolvement, and country financial sector development; and, for Component 2, byfirm asset structure and reliance on movable collateral.
• Prepare a synthesis that translates theestimated firm-level access-to-finance impact into indicative broaderdevelopment implications. This should draw on credible existing empiricalliterature on how improved access to finance and credit availability affectoutcomes such as firm investment, employment, productivity, sales growth, andbroader financial sector development. The synthesis should discuss how thefindings relate to the WBG More and Better Jobs agenda, particularly throughthe potential effects of improved access to productive finance on firminvestment, growth and employment.
• Compile and harmonize data from the World BankEnterprise Surveys, Orbis, B-ready, historical Doing Business indicators, GFIP2.0 program records, World Development Indicators, the Global FinancialDevelopment database, IMF International Financial Statistics, and targeted deskresearch. The commissioned team must procure external datasets. GFIP 2.0program records and IFC operational data will be provided by IFC.
• Incorporate feedback from an internal IFC andexternal academic peer review on the draft cross-country analytical report;document responses to peer reviewer comments in an accompanying responsematrix. The commissioned team, in consultation with WBG team, will beresponsible for identifying, engaging, and coordinating the external academicpeer reviewers.

IV. APPROACHAND METHODOLOGY The research will employ a common methodological framework,adapted as needed for the specific identification requirements and datacharacteristics of each reform dimension. The approach described below appliesto both the first component (credit bureaus) and second component (movablecollateral registries and secured transaction reforms). The methodologydescribed below is indicative; the selected team may propose refinements oralternative estimators, with justification, based on the data landscape anddevelopments in the applied econometrics literature.

1. Baseline Methodological Approach: StaggeredDifference-in-Differences

The primary identification strategy for both papers follows Love,Martínez Pería, and Singh (2013, 2016), exploiting variation in the timing ofreform adoption across countries in a difference-in-differences (DiD)framework: firms in countries that introduced a credit bureau (Component 1) ora movable collateral registry / enacted secured transaction reform (Component2) during the sample period are compared to firms in countries that did not,before and after the introduction event, controlling for country and time fixedeffects. The baseline specification is a two-way fixed effects (TWFE)model: Y ᴵᶜ ₜ = α + β · Reform ᶜ ₜ + γ · X ᴵᶜ ₜ + δ ᶜ + θ ₜ + ε ᴵᶜ ₜ where Y is a measure of credit access for firm i in country c attime t; Reform is an indicator for whether the relevant reform (credit bureaufor Component 1; movable collateral registry or secured transaction law forComponent 2) is operational in country c at time t (or a measure of itscoverage/comprehensiveness); X is a vector of firm and country characteristics;δ and θ are country and year fixed effects respectively; and ε is the errorterm. Standard errors are clustered at the country level.

2. Advanced Methods for Staggered Treatment

The standard TWFE estimator has documented limitations whentreatment is staggered across units and time — as here, since countries adoptcredit bureaus and collateral registries at different points — and treatmenteffects are heterogeneous across cohorts. Recent methodological advances(Callaway & Sant’Anna, 2021; Goodman-Bacon, 2021; de Chaisemartin &D’Haultfoeuille, 2020) have established that TWFE can produce biased estimatesin such settings. The team will therefore evaluate and implement modern robustestimators alongside the baseline approach for both papers. The preferred specification will be the Callaway and Sant’Anna(2021) estimator, which constructs group-time average treatment effects —comparing each cohort of treated countries to a clean comparison group ofnot-yet-treated or never-treated countries — and aggregates these into summarytreatment effect estimates robust to treatment effect heterogeneity. The Sunand Abraham (2021) interaction-weighted estimator provides a complementaryapproach implementable within the standard regression framework. Event-studyplots will be generated to examine the parallel trends assumption andcharacterize dynamic treatment effects around the time of each reform.

3. Heterogeneity Analysis

A core contribution of both components is a systematic examinationof heterogeneous effects. The team will estimate treatment effect heterogeneityby:

• Firm size: micro (< 10 employees), small(10–49), and medium (50–249 employees), per standard IFC/World Bankdefinitions;
• Firm age: young firms (< 5 years) vs.established firms;
• Sector: manufacturing, services, retail, andother categories as available in the Enterprise Survey;
• Gender of firm ownership: female-owned ormajority-female-managed firms vs. others, where Enterprise Survey data permits;
• Level of digitalization of reform (particularlythe registries);
• Intensity of IFC involvement: whether reformsthat involved high/low IFC involvement had any differential effects on outcomes(through use of dummy/categorical variables)
• Country financial development: whether thecountry had below- or above-median financial sector development at the time ofreform introduction, to assess whether reforms have larger effects in morefinancially underdeveloped environments;
• Asset structure (Component 2 only): firms withhigher shares of movable assets (manufacturing, agriculture, trade) vs. firmswith higher shares of fixed assets, to test whether the effects of securedtransaction reform are concentrated among firms most reliant on movablecollateral.
• Any other identified/relevant variables.

4. Data Sources

The studies will draw on three main categories of data:

• Firm-level data: World Bank Enterprise Survey(ES) data, providing comparable firm-level indicators across countries andyears — including measures of credit access (whether the firm has a bank loan,share of investment financed by banks, whether access to finance is a majorobstacle) and firm characteristics (size, age, sector, ownership, exportstatus). The use of Orbis (Bureau van Dijk) as a complementary source will behighly desirable.
• Credit infrastructure indicators: For Component1, credit bureau and registry indicators from the World Bank’s B-ready datainitiative and desk research, including: presence and introduction date of acredit bureau or registry; coverage rate (% of adult population and % of legalentities); whether positive information is included; and quality of the legaland regulatory framework. For Component 2, indicators on movable collateralregistry introduction dates, legal framework comprehensiveness (covering scopeof assets, priority rules, enforcement mechanisms), and registry operationalquality, drawn from B-ready, Doing Business historical data, GFIP 2.0 programrecords, and desk research.
• Country-level controls: World DevelopmentIndicators (WDI), the Global Financial Development (GFD) database, and IMFInternational Financial Statistics (IFS) — providing macroeconomic andfinancial sector controls including GDP per capita, inflation, domestic creditto the private sector (% of GDP), and bank concentration.

V. INDICATIVESYNTHESIS OF BROADER DEVELOPMENT IMPLICATIONS In addition to the two complementary research papers, the selected team willprepare a dedicated synthesis chapter in the main analytical report thatassesses the potential employment and other broader development and macroeconomicimplications of the estimated access-to-finance impacts. This chapter will notconstitute a separate econometric analysis of employment or macroeconomicoutcomes. Instead, it will use the estimated effects on firm-level access tofinance from the two components as the starting point and combine these withfindings from existing empirical literature on the relationships between creditavailability, firm financing constraints, investment, employment, productivityand growth. The chapter will apply appropriate parameters from this literatureto derive indicative estimates of the potential magnitude of selected effects,with particular attention to job creation. The purpose of thischapter is to provide SECO and IFC with a structured interpretation of what theestimated access-to-finance effects may imply for broader development outcomes.The analysis should explain the relevant transmission channels; transparentlydocument the methodology, parameters, assumptions and data sources used; and,where feasible, assess the sensitivity of the results to key assumptions. Anyextrapolated or imputed impacts should be presented as indicativeorder-of-magnitude estimates rather than causal estimates. The chapter shouldexplicitly discuss the limitations of the analysis, including that the study’sempirical design is not intended to causally estimate employment oreconomy-wide macroeconomic impacts. VI. DELIVERABLESAND OUTPUTS The deliverables fromthis research activity are:

• Inception report presenting the refinedmethodology, a data audit (coverage of Enterprise Survey, B-ready, Orbis, GFIP2.0 records; treatment identification feasibility), preliminary country list, anda detailed work plan.
• Main analytical report (incl. executive summary): Acomprehensive cross-country study presenting the methodology, data sources,main econometric findings, heterogeneity analysis, policy implications; and asynthesis chapter on broader development implications. The report will beaccessible to a development practitioner audience (non-technical executivesummary, clear data visualization) while maintaining full analytical rigor. The report willinclude the dedicated chapter on employment and broader development effectsdescribed in Section V.
• Technical working papers: Two research papers (10-15 pages each)– one for each component - providing full technical details of the econometricapproach, robustness checks, and data construction, for an academic andtechnical audience. The research papers should meet standards of analyticalrigor suitable for external peer review and publication. Within the assignmentperiod, the selected team will prepare complete working papers, addresscomments received through the agreed peer-review process, and finalize thepapers for submission to an appropriate working-paper series. The papers shouldalso be prepared with a view to subsequent submission to peer-reviewed academicjournals by WBG team, recognizing that journal submission and publication mayoccur beyond the timeframe of the assignment.
• Non-technicalpolicy briefs: Two 2–4 pages brief – one for each component - summarizing keyfindings and messages for SECO, IFC operational teams, and broader stakeholderdissemination.
• Data files, code, and replication package:Cleaned analytical datasets, Stata (or equivalent) do-files, and documentation(README) sufficient to reproduce all reported results, delivered together withthe final analytical report.
• Presentation to SECO: A formal presentation offindings to SECO's M&E team, to be organized upon completion of the finalreport.

All outputs, deliverables, and communicationsare expected to be in English (US) language. VII. DURATION,TIMELINES AND PAYMENT SCHEDULE Theassignment is expected to start by November 1, 2026, and be completed March 2028.Payment schedule subject to milestones:

• Contractsignature and project mobilization by December 15, 2026 — 5%
• InceptionReport Received – Methodology finalized by February 28, 2027 - 10%
• Draftcross-country analytical report and replication package by August 2027 - 20%
• Draftcross-country report methodology working paper submitted by October 2027 - 20%
• Finalanalytical reports and policy briefs, including peer reviews by December 2027 -20%
• Reviewby IFC and SECO by January 2028
• Disseminationto SECO, including presentation; by March 2028 - 25%

VIII. REQUIRED QUALIFICATIONS

Respondingteam must demonstrate:

• Organization-level criteria: years of operation,minimum of 3 comparable prior assignments, audited financials if applicable.
• Strongtrack record in applied cross-country econometric research;
• Priorevidence of capacity to both conduct rigorous technical analysis and synthesizeresults into reports accessible to non-technical audiences. The selected firmwill be supervised by the IFC technical team throughout implementation.
• Ateam composition that includes at least one academic researcher with a relevantpublication record
• Specific role requirements:

o TheTeam Leader, or at least one other senior team member, must hold a PhD inEconomics and have a strong publication record, including publications inleading peer-reviewed economics journals. o Theproposed team must demonstrate relevant expertise in the subject matter andsub-sectors covered by the assignment, evidenced through prior assignments,research, and/or publications. Team members must include Econometrician,Research Analyst. o Theproposal must include the qualifications and expected profile of the externalacademic peer reviewers proposed for the assignment

P roposal Requirements:

o Theproposal should specify the level of effort (LoE), including person-months byrole and/or overall person-month estimates for the assignment. o Theproposal should include a signed ethics and conflict-of-interest declaration. o Theproposal should clearly describe the proposed staffing mix, allocation ofresponsibilities, and quality assurance arrangements. IX. REPORTINGOBLIGATIONS The team will report administratively to Ms. Ghada O. Teimaand Mr. Hourn Thy, and technically to Mr. Sandeep Singh and Mr. Hasan Shahriarof the IFC/World Bank Group (WBG). The team will conduct regular progressreview meetings with the project team - on a bi-weekly basis during theinception and analysis phases, and monthly during the report finalization phase- and will provide written progress updates in advance of each meeting. Alldeliverables outlined in this Terms of Reference shall be submitted to the WBGin draft form for review and feedback prior to finalization. X. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, CONFIDENTIALITYAND DATA ACCESS Intellectual Property. Any material created in thefulfillment of this contract — including documents, data, code, copyrights,patents, trademarks, and other proprietary rights in and to the work — shall bethe exclusive property of IFC. Such material may not be disclosed publicly orto third parties without the prior written consent of IFC. Any disclosure ofinformation must be in line with data-sharing agreements between IFC and itsclients or partners, and with IFC’s data-sharing policies. Data access and confidentiality. IFC will provide the team withaccess to the IFC-controlled datasets referenced in the Scope of Work(including GFIP 2.0 program records and any IFC operational data required forthe IFC-involvement heterogeneity analysis). The team shall procure anythird-party licensed datasets required for the assignment (including but notlimited to Orbis) at its own cost unless otherwise agreed in the contract. Alldata shall be stored and transmitted using secure protocols agreed with IFC,and the team shall not publish or otherwise disseminate any results withoutprior written consent from IFC. XI. EVALUATION CRITERIA Proposals will be evaluated on a combined technical andfinancial basis, with an expected weighting of 80% technical and 20% financial.Technical sub-criteria includes: (i) team composition and CV quality (30%);(ii) demonstrated methodological soundness, data sources proposed, andunderstanding of the assignment (25%); (iii) prior comparable assignments andpublication track record (15%); (iv) work plan and feasibility (10%). Aparticular proposal needs to score at least 60% to be eligible forconsideration of the financial assessment. IFC reserves the right to interviewshortlisted firms before award. FUNDING SOURCE The World Bank Group intends to finance the assignment / services described below under the following:

- BB: Bank Budget

- TF0C5618: IFC

ELIGIBILITY

Eligibility restrictions apply

- [Please type list of restrictions] SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS The World Bank Group invites eligible firms to indicate their interest in providing the services. Interested firms must provide information indicating that they are qualified to perform the services (brochures, description of similar assignments, experience in similar conditions, availability of appropriate skills among staff, etc. for firms; CV and cover letter for individuals). Please note that the total size of all attachments should be less than 5MB. Firms may associate to enhance their qualifications unless otherwise stated in the solicitation documents. Where a group of firms associate to submit an EOI, they must indicate which is the lead firm. If shortlisted, the firm identified in the EOI as the lead firm will be invited to the request for proposal (RFP) phase. Expressions of Interest should be submitted, in English, electronically through WBGeProcure RFx Now NOTES Following this invitation for EOI, a shortlist of qualified firms will be formally invited to submit proposals. Shortlisting and selection will be subject to the availability of funding. Only those firms which have been shortlisted will be invited to participate in the RFP phase. No notification or debrief will be provided to firms which have not been shortlisted. If you encounter technical difficulties while uploading documents, please send an e-mail to the Help Desk at [contact details removed] prior to the submission deadline.

Procurement number: 0002023982. Expressions of interest are submitted through the World Bank Group's eProcure (RFx Now) portal, which requires vendor registration.