A ton of international aid does target development, like this much-maligned Swedish aid project in Vietnam: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%A3i_B%E1%BA%B1ng

And bringing up Singapore, that famous bastion of libertarianism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_of_Entitlement

On 1 May 1990, the then transportation unit of Singapore's Public Works Department (PWD) instituted a quota limit to vehicles called the COE when rising affluence in the city-state catapulted land transport network usage and previous measure to curb vehicle ownership by simply increasing road taxes was ineffective in controlling vehicle population growth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore

Public housing in Singapore is subsidised, built and managed by the Government of Singapore. [...] As of 2020, 78.7% of Singapore residents live in public housing, down from a high of 88.0% in 2000.

Singapore also has excellent public transport.

From the article

the idea that charter cities could spur “governance competition"

Singapore is adjacent to Malaysia, and as far as I know there's been limited influence from Singapore to Malaysia (or Indonesia, for that matter) with regards to governance. PArtly this is because most Malays view Singapore as full of weird-ass Chinese, and they way they go about their business has no bearing on Malaysia. Partly it's because Singapore doesn't want a bunch of undesirable Malays moving there and mooching off their success.

For example, Prospera is a charter city that’s currently operating within a special economic zone in Honduras. [...] Alongside benefits for areas like finance and biotech, Próspera's legal platform enables architects to design modern, eco-friendly buildings connected by parks and walking paths, in a way that wouldn’t be possible under the zoning rules of most American cities.

I dunno zip about Honduran zoning rules, but are these kind of buildings also impossible under the local rules there? It's weird that they're comparing a charter city in one country with the laws of another.

[250 years ago, the US] was experimenting with a bizarre, Roman-era style of government called “democracy”, and nobody knew if it would really work.

WTF dude, Rome was the original "a Republic, not a Democracy".

A century from now, maybe the idea that promoting governance competition leads to faster growth and greater liberty, will seem just as obvious as the idea that an elected president usually provides better leadership than a dictator or a king.

Well, when Augustus took power and forged a new political system from the ruins of the Roman Republic, he and his system ushered in an unprecedented 200+ years of peace and prosperity. Gibbon stated it was the literal best time to be alive, up until then.

[...] learn the history of development superstars like Dubai and Shenzhen.

Wait, I thought dictatorships and kings were bad? But these cities are part of those. Make up your mind!

I didn't bother reading the comments to see if anyone mentioned the above. Sorry not sorry.