An Evaluation of Pledges to Eradicate Statelessness in the SADC recognized this and has sought to leverage developmental funding mechanisms and programs that allow more long-term and cross-sector funding (Miller, 2019). Given that forced displacement more generally has reached unprecedented levels and is also increasingly protracted, international institutions have embraced and encouraged a humanitarian-developmental nexus in responding to the challenges of forced displacement. Developmental approaches emphasize expanding local and national infrastructure and creating more socio-economic opportunities for those living in protracted displacement (Kelley, 2022). In response to these major challenges, both equitable burden-sharing and more predictable funding are central principles of the GCR. Adopted in 2018 by 193 states, the GCR is a non-binding commitment to establish and operationalize a collective framework for burden-sharing. The absence of such a framework has been described as the “perennial gap” in international refugee protection, existing since the adoption of the UN Refugee Convention (Türk, 2018; Triggs and Wall, 2020). The GCR’s main goals are fourfold: to ease the pressures on host countries; to enhance refugee self-reliance; to expand access to third-country solutions; and to support conditions in countries of origin for return in safety and dignity (UNHCR, 2018). The GCR also envisages the development of resettlement places and complementary pathways for admission to third countries and other actions that states can take at the national level in support of the objectives of the GCR. In addition to states, the GCR engages with a wide range of actors, such as international and regional organizations, multilateral development banks, as well as those that have traditionally been marginalized in global multilateral processes, such as civil society organizations (CSOs), municipalities, the private sector, and refugees themselves. To operationalize this participation, stakeholders make pledges – a description of an issue that a pledge maker has identified, a statement of intent to address this issue, and a commitment of resources thereto. Pledge-making and multi-stakeholder participation are not in and of themselves new initiatives, yet the GCR is combining and consolidating them in ways that may hold promise. Additionally, the displacement–development framework has mobilized vast amounts of funding through international institutions. This includes $2 billion in loans and grants to low-income refugee-hosting states through the World Bank Group’s International Development Association Refugee Sub-Window, hundreds of millions of dollars committed to development projects through regional development banks and an uptake in initiatives and financing from the private sector (Miller, 2019; Kelley, 2022). These amounts are undoubtedly significant, as is their potential to expand local infrastructure and foster more opportunities for forcibly displaced persons and their host nations, yet this may allow states in the Global North to fund projects in the Global South without dismantling their policies built on deterrence and restriction (Chimni, 2018). Further, Hathaway (2018) argues that the GCR’s non-binding nature and lack of enforcement leave it overly procedural and aspirational and may keep intact the significant imbalances that it supposedly 113