Context
The New Delhi Declaration, adopted at the BRICS meeting held in Delhi on September 12–13, 2026, called for—among other things—reform and democratization of the Bretton Woods institutions, namely the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Similar demands have been made by other organizations representing non-Western nations. To understand the kind of reforms needed in the World Bank and the IMF, it is essential to understand their operational mechanisms.
How is the voting share of member countries determined in the World Bank?
The World Bank was established on December 25, 1945, following a decision made at the 1944 Bretton Woods Conference, and it commenced operations on June 25, 1946. Currently, it has 189 member countries. Each country must obtain membership individually. India is a founding member.
We know that in the United Nations General Assembly, every member country gets one vote, and all votes carry equal weight. However, in the World Bank, the value of votes held by different members is not equal; the weight of each country’s vote varies. A country’s total voting percentage is determined by combining two types of votes:
1.Votes derived from the number of shares a country holds in the World Bank–
Before becoming a member of the World Bank, a country must purchase shares. It receives one vote for every share held, and each share is valued at $100,000. However, a country cannot purchase shares arbitrarily; its share quota in the World Bank is determined by the quota percentage it holds in the International Monetary Fund (IMF). For instance, if a country has a 5% quota in the IMF, its shareholding in the World Bank will also be 5%. This is how a country’s total shareholding is determined. The number of votes a country possesses corresponds directly to the number of shares it holds. Thus, we see that the primary basis for determining these votes is the country’s quota in the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which is determined by the size of its economy. For this reason, it is mandatory for a country to become a member of the IMF before joining the World Bank.
2. The Basic Votes-
The total percentage of votes for a country is determined by adding “basic votes” to the votes derived from shares using the aforementioned method. Basic votes constitute 5.5 percent of a country’s total votes. For example, if a country holds votes equivalent to 10 percent based on its shares, its total vote percentage—including basic votes—would be 10.55 percent.
It is evident from this method of calculating share-based votes that not every country receives an equal number of votes in the World Bank. It is also noteworthy that for any decision to be adopted by the World Bank, at least 85 percent of the votes must be in favor of that decision.
Based on World Bank data and the aforementioned method, the five countries holding the highest percentage of votes are:
USA – 16.13 percent
Japan – 6.94 percent
China – 5.80 percent
Germany – 4.13 percent
UK and France – 3.79 percent each
India holds 2.95 percent of the votes in the World Bank.
These countries hold a similar voting position in the International Monetary Fund as well.
The details regarding the vote percentages of various countries make it clear that the USA possesses a power akin to a veto regarding World Bank decisions; without its consent, the 85 percent threshold required to pass a decision cannot be reached. If the votes of the USA are combined with those of European nations, the total reaches 42 percent, given that European countries collectively hold approximately 25 percent of the votes.
This clearly demonstrates the dominance of the USA and European nations in both the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
Why is the President of the World Bank always a US citizen?
Since 1945, the World Bank has had 14 Presidents, all of whom have been US citizens. The president serves a five-year term. The current, the 14th President, Ajay Banga, is also a US citizen of Indian origin. Although there is no written rule to this effect, the World Bank President is always from the US and the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) is from a European country.
This practice stems from the dominance of the US and Europe over both institutions and an informal understanding between them.
BRICS and other organizations of the Global South have repeatedly called for an end to this dominance, yet no solution has been found so far.
Image Courtesy- facebook
Leave a Reply