World BankWorld Bank you have succeeded? Why or why not
Proponents of the World Bank would cite its providing much-needed capital to developing nations, especially in Africa, to undertake improvement projects. They argue that these funds, and this development, is needed to promote better ways of life for people in poor countries.
Opponents would cite its willingness to loan money to corrupt regimes with terrible human rights records, its inefficiencies in securing repayment of loans, and poor decision-making in funding projects around the world.
While the World Bank and IMF has done some good, but there are some dangers as well. In the long run these can cause scandals and many other problems. In this sense, we can say that the World Bank is not successful. Let me name a few of them. First, they do not have a democratic structure. So, you have to ask who has power. It is usually industrialized countries that have sway. Second, even in their project, they have too much power and can hard the indigenous people.
There certainly is plenty of evidence to argue that the World Bank has and is doing a good job if you look at its website and various other literature. However if you look at the way it has handled loans and debt repayments, you could argue that this is definitely something that has not helped poorer countries to develop.