Aid effectiveness

Last updated

Aid effectiveness is the degree of success or failure of international aid (development aid or humanitarian aid). Concern with aid effectiveness might be at a high level of generality (whether aid on average fulfils the main functions that aid is supposed to have), or it might be more detailed (considering relative degrees of success between different types of aid in differing circumstances).

Contents

Questions of aid effectiveness have been highly contested by academics, commentators and practitioners: there is a large literature on the subject. Econometric studies in the late 20th century often found the average effectiveness of aid to be minimal or even negative. Such studies have appeared on the whole to yield more affirmative results in the early 21st century, but the picture is complex and far from clear in many respects.

Many prescriptions have been made about how to improve aid effectiveness. In 2003–2011 there existed a global movement in the name of aid effectiveness, around four high level forums on aid effectiveness. These elaborated a set of good practices concerning aid administration co-ordination and relations between donors and recipient countries. The Paris Declaration and other results of these forums embodied a broad consensus on what needed to be done to produce better development results. [1] From 2011 this movement was subsumed in one concerned more broadly with effective development co-operation, largely embodied by the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation.

The concept of aid effectiveness

Any discussion of "effectiveness" must rely on understandings or assumptions about aims. [2] In public discussions of aid effectiveness, the general aim is usually assumed to be boosting the development of recipient countries and, hence, the well-being of people living in them. But "development" and "well-being" are complex and slippery concepts. The most popular summary indicator for a country's development is probably average national income per head in its population, but this indicator does not capture inequalities of wealth and power, or the structural characteristics of the country's institutions and economy. [3] Since the 1990s the prime purpose of aid has widely been seen as poverty reduction, but this, too, can be interpreted in a variety of ways (How soon? How sustainable? What level?). [4] Such ambiguities should be clarified or at least borne in mind when considering aid effectiveness. [4]

Under the main international definition of aid – Official Development Assistance – any self-seeking motives of aid donors are supposed to be strictly subordinate to the objective of promoting the economic development and welfare of developing countries. [5] Such motives – which may involve strategic alliances, diplomatic trade-offs, commercial advantages and other political benefits [6] – are nowadays usually discussed as obstacles to aid effectiveness rather than alternative aims.

In the first decade of the 20th century, "aid effectiveness" was the declared focus of a movement joined by major donor and recipient countries and aid-related organisations, involving a series of high level forums on aid effectiveness. The agenda of this movement was largely about good practices in donor-recipient relationships, and in some cases these good practices became seen as proxies for aid effectiveness. [7]

History

The historical themes of aid effectiveness are rather different for humanitarian aid and developmental aid, so these have been treated in different sections below.

Development aid effectiveness (historical perspective)

1945 – early 1970s: Post-war boom

Although US aid is widely credited with having hastened the reconstruction of western Europe after World War II, there have been doubts about the effectiveness of this aid. G. A. Duncan in 1950 deplored the governmental character of Marshall Aid, arguing that private loans could have achieved the economic purposes more efficiently. He acknowledged that the provision of official aid also had other – political – purposes. [8]

When US economic aid shifted from Europe to poorer countries – as initially signalled by President Truman in Point Four of his 1949 inauguration speech – the strategic framework was one of building a "free world" in the face of communist threat. In the 1950s, official US development assistance was mobilized alongside military aid within the Mutual Security Program. [9] A 1957 Senate Special Committee report admitted it was impossible to prove how effective US aid since World War II had been, but considered that, without it, several countries might have been lost to the Soviet Union's sphere of influence. [10] For greater clarity in future, the committee attempted to distill the purposes of US aid into four:

  • The defense need: aid could persuade and enable other nations to be military allies (important for maintaining air bases in distant parts of the world).
  • The economic need: aid could bring more nations into a global system of commerce that would benefit the US.
  • The political need: aid could be one factor (among many others needed) for helping countries to make "long-range political progress toward freedom" rather than totalitarianism.
  • The humanitarian motive, which was seen in responding to "natural disasters or other unexpected conditions". [11]

The first of these aid drivers could be seen, during the Cold War, as part of a competition with the Soviet Union to win influence. [12] But aid was often observed to fail in this respect; for instance, in the 1950s and 1960s Egypt and Afghanistan took aid from both sides without making a decisive commitment either way, and large Russian support to China and Indonesia did not prevent those countries' leaders turning against their former patron. [12]

A more detailed theory about the kinds of effect and the causal paths through which aid could be effective was developed by Max Millikan and Walt Rostow in the mid- to late-1950s, expressed in "A Proposal" of 1956. This propounded that aid in the form of investment funds could promote the "take-off" of economies into self-reliant growth. It further suggested that this economic transformation, channeled properly, could produce a free and democratic type of society by providing: a constructive outlet for nationalism; a social solvent by interesting the urban elites in a dynamic agricultural sector; a stimulus for the emergence of authentic leaders; incentives for the attitudes of political responsibility needed to support democratisation; and feelings of international solidarity. [13] Rostow later elaborated the "take-off" theory of development in his more famous work, "The Stages of Economic Growth", in which he stated that greatly increased economic aid was needed in order to outrace the effects of population growth. [14]

In 1966, Hollis Chenery and Alan Strout published a still more sophisticated and influential macro-economic model of the way aid could boost development. [15] It involved identifying for each country whether the bottlenecks to economic growth lay in the availability of skills, domestic savings, or export earnings. In this way, an appropriate mix of technical assistance, grants or loans could be decided. The focus was on achieving a target level of GNP growth, which helped consolidate this as the prime indicator of aid effectiveness. At this time Chenery and Strout pointed to the Philippines, Taiwan, Greece and Israel as examples of countries that seemed to have achieved self-sustaining growth rates with the help of aid. [15]

Early 1970s – mid-1990s: The rise of neoliberalism

The end of the post-war boom – marked particularly by the oil crisis of 1973 – was a watershed in attitudes to aid effectiveness, as it forced a reappraisal of the existing models. [16]

In the 1980s and 1990s NGOs played a greater part in international aid. [17]

After the end of the Cold War, the declared focus of official aid began to move further towards the alleviation of poverty and the promotion of development. The countries that were in the most need and poverty became more of a priority. Once the Cold War ended, Western donors were able to enforce aid conditionality better because they no longer had geopolitical interests in recipient countries. This allowed donors to condition aid on the basis that recipient governments make economic changes as well as democratic changes. [18] It is against this background that the international aid effectiveness movement began taking shape in the late 1990s as donor governments and aid agencies began working together to improve effectiveness.

Late 1990s onward: Millennial partnerships

The global "effectiveness" movement

Aid effectiveness became more strongly recognized as a global multilateral objective in 2002 at the International Conference on Financing for Development in Monterrey, Mexico, which established the Monterrey Consensus. [19] There, the international community agreed to increase its funding for development—but acknowledged that more money alone was not enough. Donors and developing countries alike wanted to know that aid would be used as effectively as possible. They wanted it to play its optimum role in helping poor countries achieve the Millennium Development Goals, the set of targets agreed by 192 countries in 2000 which aimed to halve world poverty by 2015. Over the following nine years, a process punctuated by four high level forums on aid effectiveness (Rome 2003, Paris 2005, Accra 2008 and Busan 2011) consolidated a set of recognised good practices in aid effectiveness, and a framework for monitoring them.

In 2011 the dominant global agenda on "aid effectiveness" was subsumed in a broader movement for "effective development cooperation". This was embodied in the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (GPEDC) mandated at the Fourth High-Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan in 2011. GPEDC endorsed the prior "aid effectiveness" principles and commitments, and added others more widely concerned with development cooperation.

Another global partnership that follows the "effective development cooperation" approach is UHC2030 (the International Health Partnership for Universal Health Care 2030), formerly known simply as the International Health Partnership (or IHP+). [20] [21]

See below for more details of the aid effectiveness principles and practices advocated by this movement and its component partnerships.

Humanitarian aid effectiveness (historical perspective)

Widespread famine in Biafra during the Nigerian Civil War (1967–1970) led to greater NGO involvement in events like the Biafran airlift being attempted for the first time. [22] The way in which aid was allocated during the 1983–1985 famine in Ethiopia forever changed the way in which governments and NGOs respond to international emergencies taking place within conflict situations and raised disturbing questions about the relationship between humanitarian agencies and host governments. [23]

Findings and critiques on aid effectiveness

There is wide agreement that aid alone is not enough to lift developing countries out of poverty and that it is not the most powerful potential instrument for promoting this end. The debates on aid effectiveness are over the degree of significance of aid's effects, the extent of its unfavourable effects, and the relative effectiveness of different kinds of aid.

Major critiques

P. T. Bauer

British economist P. T. Bauer argued that aid did more harm than good, notably in his books "Dissent on Development" (1972) [24] and "Reality and Rhetoric" (1984). [25] The main harmful effect was that aid channelled resources through governments, enabling inefficient state planning and producing a general "politicization of life" in which the population shifted its activities to the political sphere rather than the economic one. [26] On the other side, Bauer saw aid's benefits as being limited to the avoidance of commercial loan costs, which he did not consider to be a significant factor in countries' development (pp. 47–49). He believed that the choices of aid projects were usually controlled by recipient governments less interested in alleviating poverty than enriching the elite (pp. 49–52).

Dambisa Moyo

Noted Zambian economist Dambisa Moyo has been a fierce opponent to development aid, and calls it “the single worst decision of modern developmental politics”. Her 2009 book, Dead Aid describes how aid has encouraged kleptocracies, corruption, aid-dependency and a series of detrimental economic effects and vicious downward spirals of development in Africa. She argues that foreign aid provides a windfall to governments which can encourage extreme forms of rent-seeking and through providing a positive shock of revenue, lead to Dutch Disease. Furthermore, this easy money offers governments an exit from the contract between them and their electorate: the contract that states that they must provide public goods in exchange for taxes. In short, it "allows the state to abdicate its responsibilities toward its people". [27] It is important to note that Moyo alludes specifically to government bilateral and multilateral aid and not small-holder charity, humanitarian or emergency aid. Her prescriptions call for increased trade and foreign direct investment, emphasizing China's burgeoning role in Africa. [28] Moyo also makes a case for micro-financing schemes, as popularized by the widespread success of Grameen Bank, to spark entrepreneurship within the continent on the ground level, thus building from the bottom-up as opposed to the top-down approach aid takes.

Econometric Studies

Many econometric studies have attempted to establish broad conclusions about aid, using regression analysis on a panel of recipient countries (seeing if their differing amounts and timings of aid received could be correlated with development indicators). These have created a mixed picture on the average effectiveness of aid, but one in which pessimism in the late 20th century has seemed to yield to qualified optimism in the early 21st century. [29] See the table in the sub-section on "Major econometric studies and their findings", below.

Challenges for measurement

It must be borne in mind that such econometric studies face many problems. One challenge for assessing the effectiveness of aid is that aid is intended to serve a variety of purposes: some of it is aimed primarily at poverty alleviation, some at economic growth, and some at other objectives such as better governance or reduction of social inequalities. Often it is not very clear what objectives are foremost, making it hard to measure results against intentions. [30] Roodman (2007), for instance, discovered that the results of seven previous econometric studies – including the very influential one by Burnside and Dollar (1997, 2000) – could not survive defining key terms in other plausible ways. [31] Moreover, different objectives have different implications for the time-scale in which results should be sought. [32] Varying sectors and modalities of aid have different effects, as do the contextual factors in recipient countries. [33] However, increasingly sophisticated analyses have made progress in accounting for these complicated effects. [32] [33]

Econometric studies frequently show more pessimistic results than might be expected from the accumulation of successes reported by donor and implementing agencies in their projects and programs. Paul Mosley termed this the micro-macro paradox and offered three potential explanations: inaccurate measurement, fungibility, and "backwash" or negative side-effects of component aid projects. [34] The micro-macro paradox has also been attributed to inadequate assessment practices. For example, conventional assessment techniques often over-emphasize inputs and outputs without taking sufficient account of societal impacts. The shortcomings of prevalent assessment practices have led to a gradual international trend towards more rigorous methods of impact assessment. [35]

Major econometric studies and their findings

The main findings of major econometric studies are summarized in the following table.

Table of econometric studies on aid effectiveness
Author/year [36] PeriodFindings on aid effectiveness;
Mosley 1987 [37] 1960-1980Aid had no significant effect on economic growth. The reason seemed to be fungibility: aid likely released other resources for unproductive uses.
Boone 1996 [38] [39] 1971-1990Aid had no clear effect on rates of infant mortality and primary education.
Burnside and Dollar 1997, [40] 2000 [41] 1970-1993Aid had a positive impact on growth in developing countries with good policies. But the overall effect of aid was unclear because donors did not especially target such countries.
Svensson 1999 [42] 1980s, 1990sAid had a positive impact on growth in more democratic countries. But aid on average was not channeled to more democratic countries.
Arvin and Borillas 2002 [43] 1975-1998Aid had no clear effect on GNP per capita.
Kosack 2003 [44] 1974-1985Aid had no clear effect on average, but improved the quality of life when combined with democracy.
Dunning 2004 [45] 1975-1997In the first few years after the Cold War foreign aid produced a small positive effect on democracy in sub-Saharan African countries, unlike in the previous 15 years.
Easterly et al. 2004 [46] 1970-1997The finding of Burnside and Dollar (2000, see above) is not robust to different definitions of aid and good policy.
Mosley et al. 2004 [47] 1980-2000Aid increased pro-poor public spending in low-income countries.
Rajan and Subramanian 2005 [48] 1960-2000There was on average no robust positive relationship between aid and growth.
Yontcheva and Masud 2005 [49] 1990-2001Aid by NGOs co-financed by the European Commission reduced infant mortality but bilateral aid generally did not.
Calderon et al. 2006 [50] [51] 1971–2002Aid had no clear effect on poverty, inequality, economic growth or democratic institutions.
Mosley and Suleiman 2007 [52] 1980-2002Aid most effectively reduced poverty when it supported public expenditures on agriculture, education and infrastructure.
Bahmani-Oskooee and Oyolola 2009 [53] 1981-2002Aid was on average effective in reducing poverty.
Clemens et al. 2011 [54] 1970-2000Aid had a modest positive effect on economic growth. [55]
Alvi and Senbeta 2012 [56] 1981-2004Aid—especially multilateral aid—significantly reduced poverty.
Kaya et al. 2013 [57] 1980-2003Aid to agriculture significantly reduced poverty.
Hirano and Otsubo 2014 [58] 1990s, 2000sSocial aid directly benefitted the poorest in society, while economic aid increased the income of the poor through growth.
Nunn and Qian 2014 [59] 1971-2006U.S. food aid increased the incidence and duration of civil conflicts, but had no robust effect on inter-state conflicts or the onset of civil conflicts. [60]
Arndt et al 2015 [61] 1970-2007Aid moderately stimulated growth, promoted structural change, improved social indicators, and reduced poverty.
Petrikova 20151994-2011Aid had a small positive effect on food security
Janjua et al. 2018 [62] 1995-2009Project aid had a significant effect on economic growth. Programme aid had a significant effect on social development.
Abellán and Alonso 2022 [63] 1990-2015Aid had a positive effect on access to safe drinking water, this effect being especially important when consistent long-term investments are put into place.

Analyses of factors limiting aid effectiveness

Aid fragmentation

Aid flows significantly increased in the first decade of the 21st century, but at the same time aid has become increasingly fragmented. There was an explosion in the number of donors, and while the number of projects multiplied, their average size dropped. Small projects being often limited in size, scope and duration, they resulted in little lasting benefit beyond the immediate effect. [64] With more players, aid became less predictable, less transparent and more volatile. [65]

Fragmentation means an increase in costs for recipient countries, as government offices are forced to divert administrative resources to cope with requests and meetings with donors [66] Decades of development have shown that if countries are to become less dependent on aid, they must follow a bottom-up approach, where they determine their own priorities and rely on their own systems to deliver that aid. [67]

Volatility/unpredictability of aid

Information, at the donors' as well at the recipients' level, is often poor, incomplete and difficult to compare with other data, and beneficiaries' feedback and formal project evaluations are rare. Aid is predictable when partner countries can be confident about the amount and the timing of aid disbursement. Not being predictable has a cost: one study assessed the deadweight loss associated with volatility at an average of 10% to 20% of a developing country's programmable aid from the European Union in recent years. [68]

Reducing the accountability of governments

Revenue generation is one of the essential pillars for developing state capacity. Effective taxation methods allow a state to provide public goods and services, from ensuring justice to providing education. [69] Taxation simultaneously serves as a government accountability mechanism, building state-citizen relationships, as citizens can now expect such service provisions upon their consent to taxation. For developing and fragile states that lack such revenue capabilities, while aid can be a seemingly necessary alternative, it has the potential to undermine institutional development. States that rely on higher percentages of aid for government revenue are less accountable to their citizens by avoiding the state-citizen relationships that taxation builds and face fewer incentives to develop public institutions. [70] The limited government capacity resulting from subpar institutional presence and effectiveness leads to: “ubiquitous corruption of state officials, large gaps between the law and actual practice in business regulation, workers who do not even show up, doctors that do not doctor, teachers who do not teach.” [71]

In the view of James Shikwati, aid in Africa sustains political elites who implement a colonial or neo-colonial agenda of subsidy and distortion of markets which holds African countries back. [72]

The tying of aid

Tied aid is defined as project aid contracted by source to private firms in the donor country. It refers to aid tied to goods and services supplied exclusively by donor country businesses or agencies. Tied aid increases the cost of assistance and has the tendency of making donors to focus more on the commercial advancement of their countries than what developing countries need. There are many ways aid can be designed to pursue the commercial objectives of donors. One of such pervasive means is by insisting on donor country products.

Others have argued that tying aid to donor-country products is common sense; it is a strategic use of aid to promote donor country's business or exports. It is further argued that tied aid - if well designed and effectively managed - would not necessarily compromise the quality as well as the effectiveness of aid. [73] However, this argument would hold particularly for programme aid, where aid is tied to a specific projects or policies and where there is little or no commercial interest. It must be emphasized, however, that commercial interest and aid effectiveness are two different things, and it would be difficult to pursue commercial interest without compromising aid effectiveness. Thus, the idea of maximizing development should be separated from the notion of pursuing commercial interest. Tied aid improves donors export performance, creates business for local companies and jobs. It also helps to expose firms, which have not had any international experience on the global market to do so. [74]

Fungibility of aid

Aid is often fungible, [75] meaning that aided activities which appear to be successful may be filling a role that would have been covered anyway by local resources; the effect of the aid is thus only to release those local resources for other purposes, which may not be so desirable.

Ways to improve aid effectiveness

Conditionalities

A major proportion of aid from donor nations is tied, mandating that a receiving nation spend on products and expertise originating only from the donor country. [76] Eritrea discovered that it would be cheaper to build its network of railways with local expertise and resources rather than to spend aid money on foreign consultants and engineers. [76] US law, backed by strong farm interests, [77] requires food aid be spent on buying food from the US rather than locally, and, as a result, half of what is spent is used on transport. [78] As a result, tying aid is estimated to increase the cost of aid by 15–30%. [79] Oxfam America and American Jewish World Service report that reforming US food aid programs could extend food aid to an additional 17.1 million people around the world. [80]

The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, as primary holders of developing countries' debt, attach structural adjustment conditionalities to loans which generally include the elimination of state subsidies and the privatization of state services. For example, the World Bank presses poor nations to eliminate subsidies for fertilizer even while many farmers cannot afford them at market prices. [81] In the case of Malawi, almost five million of its 13 million people used to need emergency food aid. However, after the government changed policy and subsidies for fertilizer and seed were introduced, farmers produced record-breaking corn harvests in 2006 and 2007 as production leaped to 3.4 million in 2007 from 1.2 million in 2005, making Malawi a major food exporter. [81] In the former Soviet states, the reconfiguration of public financing in their transition to a market economy called for reduced spending on health and education, sharply increasing poverty. [82] [83] [84]

In their April 2002 publication, Oxfam Report reveals that aid tied to trade liberalization by the donor countries such as the European Union with the aim of achieving economic objective is becoming detrimental to developing countries. [85] For example, the EU subsidizes its agricultural sectors in the expense of Latin America who must liberalize trade in order to qualify for aid. Latin America, a region with a comparative advantage on agriculture and a great reliance on its agricultural export sector, loses $4 billion annually due to EU farming subsidy policies. Carlos Santiso advocates a "radical approach in which donors cede control to the recipient country". [86]

Cash aid versus in-kind aid

A report by a High Level Panel on Humanitarian Cash Transfers found that only 6% of aid is delivered in the form of cash or vouchers. [87] But there is a growing realization among aid groups that, for locally available goods, giving cash or cash vouchers instead of imported goods is a cheaper, faster, and more efficient way to deliver aid. [88]

Evidence shows that cash can be more transparent, more accountable, more cost effective, help support local markets and economies, and increase financial inclusion and give people more dignity and choice. [87] Sending cash is cheaper as it does not have the same transaction costs as shipping goods. Sending cash is also faster than shipping the goods. In 2009 for sub-Saharan Africa, food bought locally by the WFP cost 34 percent less and arrived 100 days faster than food sent from the United States, where buying food from the United States is required by law. [89] Cash aid also helps local food producers, usually the poorest in their countries, while imported food may damage their livelihoods and risk continuing hunger in the future. [89] Unconditional cash transfers, for example, appear to be an effective intervention for reducing extreme poverty, while at the same time also improving health and education outcomes. [90] [91]

The World Food Program (WFP), the biggest non-governmental distributor of food, announced that it will begin distributing cash and vouchers instead of food in some areas, which Josette Sheeran, the WFP's executive director, described as a "revolution" in food aid. [88] [92]

Coordination

While the number of Non-governmental Organization have increased dramatically over the past few decades, fragmentation in aid policy is an issue. [79] Because of such fragmentation, health workers in several African countries, for example, say they are so busy meeting western delegates that they can only do their proper jobs in the evening. [79]

One of the Paris Declaration's priorities is to reduce systems of aid that are "parallel" to local systems. [79] For example, Oxfam reported that, in Mozambique, donors are spending $350 million a year on 3,500 technical consultants, which is enough to hire 400,000 local civil servants, weakening local capacity. [79] Between 2005 and 2007, the number of parallel systems did fall, by about 10% in 33 countries. [79] In order to improve coordination and reduce parallel systems, the Paris Declaration suggests that aid recipient countries lay down a set of national development priorities and that aid donors fit in with those plans. [79]

Aid priorities

Laurie Garret, author of the article "The Challenge of Global Health" points out that the current aid and resources are being targeted at very specific, high-profile diseases, rather than at general public health. Aid is "stovepiped" towards narrow, short-term goals relating to particular programs or diseases such as increasing the number of people receiving anti-retroviral treatment, and increasing distribution of bed nets. These are band aid solutions to larger problems, as it takes healthcare systems and infrastructure to create significant change. Donors lack the understanding that effort should be focused on broader measures that affect general well-being of the population, and substantial change will take generations to achieve. Aid often does not provide maximum benefit to the recipient, and reflects the interests of the donor. [93]

Furthermore, consider the breakdown, where aid goes and for what purposes. In 2002, total gross foreign aid to all developing countries was $76 billion. Dollars that do not contribute to a country's ability to support basic needs interventions are subtracted. Subtract $6 billion for debt relief grants. Subtract $11 billion, which is the amount developing countries paid to developed nations in that year in the form of loan repayments. Next, subtract the aid given to middle income countries, $16 billion. The remainder, $43 billion, is the amount that developing countries received in 2002. But only $12 billion went to low-income countries in a form that could be deemed budget support for basic needs. [94] When aid is given to the Least Developed Countries who have good governments and strategic plans for the aid, it is thought that it is more effective. [94]

Logistics

Humanitarian aid is argued to often not reach those who are intended to receive it. For example, a report composed by the World Bank in 2006 stated that an estimated half of the funds donated towards health programs in sub-Saharan Africa did not reach the clinics and hospitals. Money is paid out to fake accounts, prices are increased for transport or warehousing, and drugs are sold to the black market. Another example is in Ghana, where approximately 80% of donations do not go towards their intended purposes. This type of corruption only adds to the criticism of aid, as it is not helping those who need it, and may be adding to the problem. [93] Only about one fifth of U.S. aid goes to countries classified by the OECD as 'least developed.' [95] This "pro-rich" trend is not unique to the United States. [94] [95] According to Collier, "the middle income countries get aid because they are of much more commercial and political interest than the tiny markets and powerlessness of the bottom billion." [96] What this means is that, at the most basic level, aid is not targeting the most extreme poverty. [94] [95]

The logistics in which the delivery of humanitarian occurs can be problematic. For example, an earthquake in 2003 in Bam, Iran left tens of thousands of people in need of disaster zone aid. Although aid was flown in rapidly, regional belief systems, cultural backgrounds and even language seemed to have been omitted as a source of concern. Items such as religiously prohibited pork, and non-generic forms of medicine that lacked multilingual instructions came flooding in as relief. An implementation of aid can easily be problematic, causing more problems than it solves. [97]

Considering transparency, the amount of aid that is recorded accurately has risen from 42% in 2005 to 48% in 2007. [79]

Improving the economic efficiency of aid

Currently, donor institutions make proposals for aid packages to recipient countries. The recipient countries then make a plan for how to use the aid based on how much money has been given to them. Alternatively, NGO's receive funding from private sources or the government and then implement plans to address their specific issues. According to Sachs, in the view of some scholars, this system is inherently ineffective. [94]

According to Sachs, we should redefine how we think of aid. The first step should be to learn what developing countries hope to accomplish and how much money they need to accomplish those goals. Goals should be made with the Millennium Development Goals in mind for these furnish real metrics for providing basic needs. The "actual transfer of funds must be based on rigorous, country-specific plans that are developed through open and consultative processes, backed by good governance in the recipient countries, as well as careful planning and evaluation." [94]

Possibilities are also emerging as some developing countries are experiencing rapid economic growth, they are able to provide their own expertise gained from their recent transition. This knowledge transfer can be seen in donors, such as Brazil, whose $1 billion in aid outstrips that of many traditional donors. [98] Brazil provides most of its aid in the form of technical expertise and knowledge transfers. [98] This has been described by some observers as a 'global model in waiting'. [99]

Using the private sector

According to Laurie Garrett, for health aid to be maximized efficiently and most optimally, donations need to be directed to areas such as local industries, franchises, or profit centers in developing countries. By doing so, these actions can sustain health related spending and result in growth in the long run. [100]

Paul Collier, in The Bottom Billion, suggests a model he calls “Independent Service Authorities”. These are organizations, independent from the government, that co-opt civil society to manage aid and public money and incorporate the scrutiny of public opinion and NGOs to determine how to maximize output from the expenditure of this money. [101]

Sensitivity to recipient country institutions

Since the effectiveness of aid usually depends on the good-functioning of institutions in the recipient country, and since potential recipients are very varied in this respect, Charles Kenny (2006) argues that aid strategies must be tailored to the state of institutions in each case. Where institutions are strong, it is appropriate to provide programmatic aid. Where they are weak, there may be a role for aid in analysis, consensus-building and technical assistance to improve them, and meanwhile other "insulated" projects might go ahead if they do not harm the prospects for developing sound governmental institutions. [102]

Best practices according to the High Level Forums on Aid Effectiveness

The Paris Declaration and other results of the High Level Forums on Aid Effectiveness (2003-2011) embodied a broad consensus on what needed to be done to produce better development results. [103] Its principles lay open the possible ways to undertake, which can be interpreted also as the major objectives of good aid: fostering recipient countries' ownership of development policies and strategies, maximizing donors' coordination and harmonization, improving aid transparency and mutual accountability of donors and recipients, just to name a few. [104]

The forums were supported by work done by the OECD, which had explored—through peer reviews and other work by the Development Assistance Committee (DAC)—the reasons why aid has and has not worked. This has resulted in a body of best practices and principles that can be applied globally to make aid work better.

Improving aid transparency and mutual accountability of donors and recipients

Some believe that the way to improvement is through better monitoring and evaluation, increased transparency, accountability and learning. For instance, Stefan Schmitz, a former senior aid official in the German government and the OECD, has argued that reporting duties, results-orientated action and ongoing performance assessments are essential for the sake of aid effectiveness, but political will must be already there for this to happen. [105]

The Accra Agenda for Action states that transparency and accountability are essential elements for development results, as well as drivers of progress. [106] Mutual accountability and transparency is one of the five partnership commitments of the Paris Declaration. [107] Through 'transparency', donors and recipients can be held accountable for what they spend and aid can be made more effective by knowing the three Ws of transparency:

  • Who gives money to which recipient?
  • What project is being funded and for what purpose? and
  • Where? [108]

Transparency offers a valuable answer to insecurity, making aid "predictable" and "reliable". Transparency has been shown to improve service delivery and to reduce opportunities for diversion and therefore corruption. [109]

Transparency can be defined as a basic expression of mutual accountability. [110] Mutual accountability can only work if there is a global culture of transparency that demands provision of information through a set of rules and behavioral norms, which are difficult to enforce in the case of official development cooperation. In particular for emerging economy donors and private development assistance, these norms are only at a nascent stage. Kharas [111] suggest to adopt the "regulation through information" approach, [112] which has been developed and has proven its effectiveness in the case of the European integration. In fact, at the international level, when the enforcement of mandatory rules is difficult, the solution could be to provide and make available transparent, relevant, accurate and reliable information, which can be used to reward or sanction individual aid agencies according to their performances. This means establishing a strong culture of accountability within aid, which rewards aid successes but penalizes failures.

To achieve this, literature on the topic [113] suggest that donors should agree on adopting a standardized format for providing information on volume, allocation and results, such as the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI), or other similar standards, and commit to improve recipient countries' databases with technical, financial and informational support. The format should be easily downloadable and with sufficient disaggregation to enable comparison with other data. Making aid data public and comparable among donors, would be likely to encourage a process of positive emulation towards a better usage of public funds. After all, official development assistance (ODA) is a voluntary transfer that depends on the support of donor country taxpayers. Donors should therefore consider improving the transparency and traceability of aid funds also as a way of increasing engagement and support toward aid inside their own country. Moreover, a generalized adoption of IATI would ensure the publication of aid information in a timely way, the compatibility with developing countries' budgets and the reliability of future projections, which would have a strong and positive effect on the predictability of aid. [114]

Finally, to improve accountability while building evaluation capabilities in aid recipient countries and systematically collecting beneficiaries’ feedback, different mechanisms to evaluate and monitor transparency should be considered, such as independent third-party reviews, peer reviews or mutual reviews. [115]

See also

Related Research Articles

Dependency theory is the idea that resources flow from a "periphery" of poor and exploited states to a "core" of wealthy states, enriching the latter at the expense of the former. A central contention of dependency theory is that poor states are impoverished and rich ones enriched by the way poor states are integrated into the "world system". This theory was officially developed in the late 1960s following World War II, as scholars searched for the root issue in the lack of development in Latin America.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Aid agency</span> Organization dedicated to distributing aid

An aid agency, also known as development charity, is an organization dedicated to distributing aid. Many professional aid organisations exist, both within government, between governments as multilateral donors and as private voluntary organizations or non-governmental organisations. The International Committee of the Red Cross is the world's second oldest humanitarian organisation and is unique in being mandated by international treaty to uphold the Geneva Conventions. The Sovereign Order of Malta, established in 1099 as the Order of St. John of Jerusalem, has an unbroken tradition of over 900 years of hospitaller activities, continuing to this day. Even in its modern guise under international law, it was recognized at the Congress of Verona of 1822, and since 1834 headquartered in Palazzo Malta in Rome, decades before the Red Cross.

Official development assistance (ODA) is a category used by the Development Assistance Committee (DAC) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to measure foreign aid. The DAC first adopted the concept in 1969. It is widely used as an indicator of international aid flow. It refers to material resources given by the governments of richer countries to promote the economic development of poorer countries and the welfare of their people. The donor government agency may disburse such resources to the government of the recipient country or through other organizations. Most ODA is in the form of grants, but some is measured as the concessional value in soft (low-interest) loans.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Development aid</span> Financial aid given to support the development of developing countries

Development aid is a type of foreign/international/overseas aid given by governments and other agencies to support the economic, environmental, social, and political development of developing countries. Closely related concepts include: developmental aid, development assistance, official development assistance, development policy, development cooperation and technical assistance. It is distinguished from humanitarian aid by aiming at a sustained improvement in the conditions in a developing country, rather than short-term relief. Development aid is thus widely seen as a major way to meet Sustainable Development Goal 1 for the developing nations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Aid</span> Voluntary transfer of resources from one country to another

In international relations, aid is – from the perspective of governments – a voluntary transfer of resources from one country to another. The type of aid given may be classified according to various factors, including its intended purpose, the terms or conditions under which it is given, its source, and its level of urgency. For example, aid may be classified based on urgency into emergency aid and development aid.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Poverty reduction</span> Measures to reduce poverty permanently

Poverty reduction, poverty relief, or poverty alleviation is a set of measures, both economic and humanitarian, that are intended to permanently lift people out of poverty.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tied aid</span> International transfer of resources with geographic limits on procurement and spending

Tied aid is a kind of foreign aid. It must be spent on products and services provided by companies from the country providing the aid or in a group of specified countries.

An international non-governmental organization (INGO) is an organization which is independent of government involvement and extends the concept of a non-governmental organization (NGO) to an international scope.

Military aid is aid which is used to assist a country or its people in its defense efforts, or to assist a poor country in maintaining control over its own territory. Many countries receive military aid to help with counter-insurgency efforts. Military aid can be given to a rebellion to help fight another country. This aid may be given in the form of money for foreign militaries to buy weapons and equipment from the donor country.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Development Assistance Committee</span> OECD committee

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC) is a forum to discuss issues surrounding aid, development and poverty reduction in developing countries. It describes itself as being the "venue and voice" of the world's major donor countries.

The Humanitarian Response Index (HRI) is an independent civil society initiative to annually assess and rank wealthy countries against their commitment to improve the quality and effectiveness of their humanitarian assistance. Developed by DARA, the HRI's intended purpose is to assist the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's Development Assistance Committee (OECD/DAC) donor governments ensure that their humanitarian assistance has the greatest impact on beneficiaries. The HRI's aim is to improve the quality and effectiveness of aid, and promote greater efficiency, effectiveness, transparency and accountability of government donors. The first edition was published in 2007, followed by subsequent editions in 2008, 2009, and 2010.

Homi Kharas is a British economist who has been a senior fellow and deputy director for the global economy and development program at the Brookings Institution since 2005.

A cash transfer is a direct transfer payment of money to an eligible person. Cash transfers are either unconditional cash transfers or conditional cash transfers. They may be provided by organisations funded by private donors, or a local or regional government.

Publish What You Fund is a global campaign for aid transparency– more and better information about aid.

UHC2030, formerly known as the International Health Partnership (IHP+), is a global platform which brings together multiple stakeholders to take action to advance progress towards universal health coverage (UHC) by mobilizing political commitment, demanding and tracking accountability, and promoting collective action for health systems. The global platform is co-hosted by the World Health Organization, the World Bank and the OECD.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Korea International Cooperation Agency</span> South Korean aid organization

The Korea International Cooperation Agency was established in 1991 by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of South Korea as a governmental organization for Official Development Assistance (ODA). KOICA's goal is to enhance the effectiveness of South Korea's grant aid programs for developing countries by implementing the government's grant aid and technical cooperation programs. KOICA is led by three-year-term president of the board who is appointed by the President upon the recommendation of Foreign Minister.

The East Asia Climate Partnership (EACP) is Korea's international initiative for global cooperative development. Led by the Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA), a Korean government agency responsible for providing overseas grant aid, the EACP helps tackle climate change in developing countries and promotes green growth in Asia.

Chinese foreign aid may be considered as both governmental (official) and private development aid and humanitarian aid originating from the People's Republic of China.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Policy Coherence for Development</span>

Policy coherence for development (PCD) is an approach and policy tool for integrating the economic, social, environmental and governance dimensions of sustainable development at all stages of domestic and international policy making. It is the aim of Policy Coherence for Development to make foreign relations to be as ecologically, economically and socially coherent as possible and thereby to make international co-operation for international development more effective.

Four high level forums on aid effectiveness were held between 2003 and 2011 as part of a "continuous effort towards modernising, deepening and broadening development co-operation and the delivery of aid" coordinated through the OECD. They took place at Rome (2003), Paris (2005), Accra (2008) and Busan (2011).

References

  1. ↑ "Effective development co-operation - OECD". www.oecd.org. Retrieved 2019-07-04.
  2. ↑ Kenny, Charles (September 2006). What is effective aid? How would donors allocate it? (PDF) (Report). World Bank. pp. 2–3. Retrieved 2021-03-05.
  3. ↑ Mahbub ul Haq; et al. (1990). Human Development Report 1990 (PDF). UNDP. Retrieved 2021-03-01.
  4. 1 2 Barder, Owen (2009). "What Is Poverty Reduction?" (PDF). Centre for Global Development. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2020-12-23.
  5. ↑ "Official Development Assistance (ODA)". OECD . Archived from the original on 2019-04-22. Retrieved 2021-03-01.
  6. ↑ Kenny, Charles (2006). "What Is Effective Aid? How Would Donors Allocate It?" (PDF). The World Bank . Archived (PDF) from the original on 2021-11-01. Retrieved 2021-03-01.
  7. ↑ Mitchell, Ian; McKee, Caitlin (15 November 2018). "How Do You Measure Aid Quality and Who Ranks Highest?". Center for Global Development . Archived from the original on 2019-05-10. Retrieved 2021-03-01.
  8. ↑ Duncan, G. A. (1950). "Marshall Aid". Journal of the Statistical and Social Inquiry Society of Ireland. 18: 293.
  9. ↑ Haviland, H. Field (1958). "Foreign Aid and the Policy Process: 1957". American Political Science Review. 52 (3): 689–724. doi:10.2307/1951900. ISSN   1537-5943. JSTOR   1951900. S2CID   144564474.
  10. ↑ US Senate Special Committee (1957). Report of the special committee to study the foreign aid program. United States Government Printing Office. pp. 7–8.
  11. ↑ US Senate Special Committee (1957). Report of the special committee to study the foreign aid program. United States Government Printing Office. pp. 8–10.
  12. 1 2 Morgner, Aurelius (1967). "The American Foreign Aid Program: Costs, Accomplishments, Alternatives?". The Review of Politics. 29 (1): 72–73. doi:10.1017/S0034670500023731. ISSN   0034-6705. JSTOR   1405813. S2CID   145492668.
  13. ↑ Millikan, Max F (1957). A proposal: Key to an effective foreign policy. New York: Harper & Brothers.
  14. ↑ Rostow, W. W. (1962). The Stages of Economic Growth. Cambridge University Press. p. 143.
  15. 1 2 Chenery, Hollis B.; Strout, Alan M. (1966). "Foreign Assistance and Economic Development". The American Economic Review. 56 (4): 679–733. ISSN   0002-8282. JSTOR   1813524.
  16. ↑ Riddell, Roger (1987). Foreign aid reconsidered. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 92–95. ISBN   0-8018-3546-1. OCLC   15630613.
  17. ↑ Lewis D. (2010) "Nongovernmental Organizations, Definition and History" (PDF). In: Anheier H.K., Toepler S. (eds) International Encyclopedia of Civil Society. Springer, New York, NY.
  18. ↑ Dunning, Thad. "Conditioning the Effects of Aid: Cold War Politics, Donor Credibility, and Democracy in Africa." International Organization 58.02 (2004)
  19. ↑ "International Conference on Financing for Development". Un.org. Retrieved 2012-12-26.
  20. ↑ "uhc2030: History". UHC2030. Archived from the original on 2017-10-01. Retrieved 2021-02-27.
  21. ↑ "IHP+ Strategic Directions 2016-17" (PDF). uhc2030. Retrieved 2021-02-27.
  22. ↑ Omaka, Arua Oko (1 June 2016). "Humanitarian Action: The Joint Church Aid and Health Care Intervention in the Nigeria-Biafra War, 1967–1970". Canadian Journal of History. 49 (3): 423–227. doi:10.3138/cjh.49.3.423.
  23. ↑ Waal, Alexander De (1991). Evil Days: Thirty Years of War and Famine in Ethiopia. Human Rights Watch. p.  2. ISBN   9781564320384.
  24. ↑ Bauer, P. T. (1976). Dissent on development. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. ISBN   0-674-21282-7. OCLC   2666082.
  25. ↑ Bauer, P. T. (1984). Reality and rhetoric : studies in the economics of development. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. ISBN   0-674-74946-4. OCLC   9894295.
  26. ↑ Bauer, P. T. (1984). Reality and rhetoric : studies in the economics of development. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. pp. 27–28, 46. ISBN   0-674-74946-4. OCLC   9894295.
  27. ↑ Moyo, Dambisa (2009). Aid: Why Aid Is Not Working and How There Is a Better Way for Africa. Douglas & Mcintyre. ISBN   978-1-55365-542-8.
  28. ↑ Moyo, Dambisa (2009). Dead Aid: Why Aid Is Not Working and How There Is a Better Way for Africa. Douglas & Mcintyre. p. 124.
  29. ↑ Mahembe, Edmore; Odhiambo, Nicholas M. (2019-01-01). Read, Robert (ed.). "Foreign aid and poverty reduction: A review of international literature". Cogent Social Sciences. 5 (1): 1625741. doi: 10.1080/23311886.2019.1625741 . ISSN   2331-1886.
  30. ↑ Barder, Owen (2009-04-21). "What is Poverty Reduction?". CGD Working Papers. Retrieved 2010-06-02.
  31. ↑ Roodman, David (2007). "The Anarchy of Numbers: Aid, Development and Cross-Country Empirics". The World Bank Economic Review. 21 (2): 255–277. doi:10.1093/wber/lhm004. hdl: 10.1093/wber/lhm004 . S2CID   14359188.
  32. 1 2 Clemens MA; et al. (2011). "Counting Chickens when they Hatch: Timing and the Effects of Aid on Growth". The Economic Journal. 122 (561): 590–617. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2011.02482.x .
  33. 1 2 Petrikova, Ivica (2015). "Aid for food security: does it work?" (PDF). International Journal of Development Issues. 14: 41–59. doi:10.1108/IJDI-07-2014-0058.
  34. ↑ Mosley, Paul (1987). Foreign Aid: Its Defense and Reform . University Press of Kentucky. ISBN   978-0-8131-1608-2 . Retrieved December 7, 2009. Paul Mosley.
  35. ↑ Faust, Jörg (2009). "Reliable evidence of impact". Development and Cooperation. 36 (1): 14–17. Archived from the original on 2010-02-27.
  36. ↑ Bibliographic reference to be given in a note
  37. ↑ Mosley, Paul (1987). Foreign aid, its defense and reform. Lexington, Ky.: University Press of Kentucky. ISBN   0-8131-1608-2. OCLC   14240724.
  38. ↑ Boone, Peter (1995). Politics and the effectiveness of foreign aid (PDF) (Report). National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved 2021-02-19.
  39. ↑ A similar version was published as Boone, Peter (1996). "Politics and the effectiveness of foreign aid" (PDF). European Economic Review. 40 (2): 289–329. doi:10.1016/0014-2921(95)00127-1. S2CID   154155908 – via Science Direct.
  40. ↑ Burnside, Craig; Dollar, David (1997). Aid, policies and growth (PDF) (Report). World Bank. Retrieved 2021-02-20.
  41. ↑ Burnside, Craig; Dollar, David (September 2000). "Aid, Policies, and Growth". American Economic Review. 90 (4): 847–868. doi:10.1257/aer.90.4.847. ISSN   0002-8282. S2CID   14261087.
  42. ↑ Svensson, J. (1999). "Aid, Growth and Democracy". Economics & Politics. 11 (3): 275–297. doi:10.1111/1468-0343.00062. ISSN   1468-0343.
  43. ↑ Arvin, B. Mak; Barillas, Francisco (2002-11-01). "Foreign aid, poverty reduction, and democracy". Applied Economics. 34 (17): 2151–2156. doi:10.1080/00036840210136718. ISSN   0003-6846. S2CID   154546476.
  44. ↑ Kosack, Stephen (2003-01-01). "Effective Aid: How Democracy Allows Development Aid to Improve the Quality of Life". World Development. 31 (1): 1–22. doi:10.1016/S0305-750X(02)00177-8. ISSN   0305-750X.
  45. ↑ Dunning, Thad (2004). "Conditioning the Effects of Aid: Cold War Politics, Donor Credibility, and Democracy in Africa". International Organization. 58 (2): 409–423. doi:10.1017/S0020818304582073. ISSN   1531-5088. S2CID   154368924.
  46. ↑ Easterly, William; Levine, Ross; Roodman, David (2004-05-01). "Aid, Policies, and Growth: Comment". American Economic Review. 94 (3): 774–780. doi:10.1257/0002828041464560. ISSN   0002-8282.
  47. ↑ Mosley, Paul; Hudson, John; Verschoor, Arjan (2004-06-01). "Aid, Poverty Reduction and the 'New Conditionality'". The Economic Journal. 114 (496): F217–F243. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0297.2004.00220.x. ISSN   0013-0133. S2CID   55919902.
  48. ↑ Rajan, Raghuram G.; Subramanian, Arvind (2005). Aid and growth: What does the cross-country evidence really show? (PDF) (Report). National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved 2021-02-23.
  49. ↑ Yontcheva, Boriana; Masud, Nadia (2005). Does Foreign Aid Reduce Poverty? Empirical Evidence from Nongovernmental and Bilateral Aid (Report). IMF. Retrieved 2021-02-19.
  50. ↑ Calderon, Mark; Chong, Alberto; Gradstein (2006). Foreign aid, income inequality, and poverty (PDF) (Report). Inter-American Development Bank. Retrieved 2021-02-20.
  51. ↑ A similar version was published as Chong, Alberto; Gradstein, Mark; Calderon, Cecilia (2009-07-01). "Can foreign aid reduce income inequality and poverty?". Public Choice. 140 (1): 59–84. doi:10.1007/s11127-009-9412-4. ISSN   1573-7101. S2CID   154071767.
  52. ↑ Mosley, Paul; Suleiman, Abrar (2007). "Aid, Agriculture and Poverty in Developing Countries". Review of Development Economics. 11 (1): 139–158. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9361.2006.00354.x. ISSN   1467-9361. S2CID   154905396.
  53. ↑ Bahmani-Oskooee, Mohsen; Oyolola, Maharouf (2009-01-01). "Poverty reduction and aid: cross-country evidence". International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. 29 (5/6): 264–273. doi:10.1108/01443330910965796. ISSN   0144-333X.
  54. ↑ Clemens, Michael A.; Radelet, Steven; Bhavnani, Rikhil R.; Bazzi, Samuel (2012-06-01). "Counting Chickens when they Hatch: Timing and the Effects of Aid on Growth". The Economic Journal. 122 (561): 590–617. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2011.02482.x . ISSN   0013-0133.
  55. ↑ The study re-analyzed data from Boone (1996), Burnside and Dollar (2000), and Rajan and Subramanian (2008), treating time-lags differently.
  56. ↑ Alvi, Eskander; Senbeta, Aberra (2012). "Does Foreign Aid Reduce Poverty?". Journal of International Development. 24 (8): 955–976. doi:10.1002/jid.1790. ISSN   1099-1328.
  57. ↑ Kaya, Ozgur; Kaya, Ilker; Gunter, Lewell (2013). "Foreign Aid and the Quest for Poverty Reduction: Is Aid to Agriculture Effective?". Journal of Agricultural Economics. 64 (3): 583–596. doi:10.1111/1477-9552.12023. ISSN   1477-9552.
  58. ↑ Hirano, Yumeka; Otsubo, Shigero (2014). Aid Is Good for the Poor (Report). World Bank. Retrieved 2021-02-20.
  59. ↑ Nunn, Nathan; Qian, Nancy (2014-06-01). "US Food Aid and Civil Conflict". American Economic Review. 104 (6): 1630–1666. doi:10.1257/aer.104.6.1630. ISSN   0002-8282. S2CID   12935268.
  60. ↑ Nunn and Qian acknowledged that such aid might also have other, possibly beneficial, effects
  61. ↑ Arndt, Channing; Jones, Sam; Tarp, Finn (2015-05-01). "Assessing Foreign Aid's Long-Run Contribution to Growth and Development". World Development. 69: 6–18. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.12.016 . ISSN   0305-750X.
  62. ↑ Janjua, Pervez Zamurrad; Muhammad, Malik; Usman, Muhammad (2018-06-01). "Impact of Project and Programme Aid on Economic Growth: A Cross Country Analysis". The Pakistan Development Review. 57 (2): 145–174. doi: 10.30541/v57i2pp.145-174 (inactive 2024-06-22). ISSN   0030-9729.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of June 2024 (link)
  63. ↑ Abellán, Javier; Alonso, José Antonio (2022). "Promoting global access to water and sanitation: A supply and demand perspective". Water Resources and Economics. 38: 100194. Bibcode:2022WRE....3800194A. doi:10.1016/j.wre.2022.100194. S2CID   246261266.
  64. ↑ Fengler, M.G and Kharas, H. Delivering Aid Differently: Lesson from the Field. Brookings Institution, Washington D.C. 2010.
  65. ↑ Kharas, H., Makino, K., Jung, W. Catalizing Development. Brookings Institution Press, Washington D.C. 2011
  66. ↑ As an example, in 2005, government authorities in Vietnam received 791 missions from donors, which means more than two a day, including weekends and holidays. See, for example, OECD, DAC, "The Challenge of Capacity Development: Working Towards Good Practice", Paris, 2006.
  67. ↑ Deutscher, E., and Fyson, S., "Improving the Effectiveness of Aid", Finance and Development, Vol. 25, n. 3, The International Monetary Fund, September 2008.
  68. ↑ Kharas, H. "Measuring the Cost of Aid Volatility". Wolfensohn Centre for Development, Working Parper 3, Brookings Institution, Washington D.C. 2008
  69. ↑ Bräutigam, Deborah (2002). "Building Leviathan: Revenue, State Capacity and Governance" (PDF). IDS Bulletin. 33 (3): 1–17. doi:10.1111/j.1759-5436.2002.tb00034.x.
  70. ↑ "An Aid-Institutions Paradox? A Review Essay on Aid Dependency and State Building in Sub-Saharan Africa- Working Paper 74". Center For Global Development. Retrieved 2017-05-17.
  71. ↑ Pritchett, Lant; Woolcock, Michael; Andrews, Matt (2013-01-01). "Looking Like a State: Techniques of Persistent Failure in State Capability for Implementation" (PDF). The Journal of Development Studies. 49 (1): 1–18. doi:10.1080/00220388.2012.709614. ISSN   0022-0388. S2CID   14363040.
  72. ↑ Shikwati, James (2006). "The Future of Africa in the World". Inter Region Economic Network: 6. Archived from the original on 2013-06-17.
  73. ↑ Aryeetey, 1995; Sowa 1997.
  74. ↑ Tied Aid and Multi-Donor Budgetary Support, Journal of International Development, Vol 17. Issue 8
  75. ↑ Kenny, Charles (September 2006). What is effective aid? How would donors allocate it? (PDF) (Report). World Bank. p. 9. Retrieved 2021-03-05.
  76. 1 2 "Tied aid strangling nations, says UN". ispnews.net. Archived from the original on 23 December 2010. Retrieved 27 May 2011.
  77. ↑ "Aid policy: Helping whom exactly?". economist. 27 April 2013. Retrieved 5 May 2013.
  78. ↑ "Let them eat micronutrients". newsweek.com. 20 September 2008. Retrieved 27 May 2011.
  79. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 "The future of aid". economist. 6 September 2008. Retrieved 27 March 2013.
  80. ↑ "Food aid reform". Oxfam America.
  81. 1 2 Dugger, Celia W. (2 December 2007). "Ending famine simply by ignoring the experts". nytimes.com. Archived from the original on 11 May 2011. Retrieved 27 May 2011.
  82. ↑ "Study Finds Poverty Deepening in Former Communist Countries". nytimes.com. 12 October 2000. Retrieved 28 May 2011.
  83. ↑ Transition: The First Ten Years – Analysis and Lessons for Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union, The World Bank, Washington, DC, 2002, p. 4.
  84. ↑ "Child poverty soars in eastern Europe". BBC News. 11 October 2000. Archived from the original on 12 May 2011. Retrieved 27 May 2011.
  85. ↑ "Oxfam - Trade - Europe's Double Standards". April 2002. Archived from the original on 3 October 2003. Retrieved 28 May 2018.
  86. ↑ Santiso, Carlos (Fall 2001). "Good Governance and Aid Effectiveness: The World Bank and Conditionality". The Georgetown Public Policy Review. 7 (1): 1–22.
  87. 1 2 "Doing cash differently: how cash transfers can transform humanitarian aid". ODI. 9 February 2016.
  88. 1 2 "UN aid debate: Give cash, not food?". Christian Science Monitor. 4 June 2008.
  89. 1 2 Rosenberg, Tina (24 April 2013). "When food isn't the answer to hunger". nytimes.com. Retrieved 5 May 2013.
  90. ↑ Pega, Frank; Liu, Sze; Walter, Stefan; Pabayo, Roman; Saith, Ruhi; Lhachimi, Stefan (2017). "Unconditional cash transfers for reducing poverty and vulnerabilities: effect on use of health services and health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 11 (4): CD011135. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD011135.pub2. PMC   6486161 . PMID   29139110.
  91. ↑ Pega, Frank; Pabayo, Roman; Benny, Claire; Lee, Eun-Young; Lhachimi, Stefan; Liu, Sze (2022). "Unconditional cash transfers for reducing poverty and vulnerabilities: effect on use of health services and health outcomes in low- and middle-income countries". Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2022 (3): CD011135. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD011135.pub3. PMC   8962215 . PMID   35348196.
  92. ↑ "Cash roll-out to help hunger hot spots". World Food Programme. 12 August 2008. Archived from the original on 12 February 2009. Retrieved 5 May 2013.
  93. 1 2 Garrett, Laurie. "The Challenge of Global Health". Foreign Affairs. 86 (1).
  94. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Sachs, Jeffrey D. 2005. The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time. New York: Penguin Books.
  95. 1 2 3 Singer, Peter. 2009. The Life You Can Save. New York:Random House.
  96. ↑ Collier, Paul (25 May 2007). The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About It . Oxford University Press. ISBN   9780199740949.
  97. ↑ Habibzadeh, Farrokh; Yadollahie, Mahboobeh; Kucheki, Maryam (August 2008). "International aid in disaster zones: help or headache?". The Lancet. 372 (9636): 374. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(08)61157-5 . ISSN   0140-6736. PMID   18675688. S2CID   50115.
  98. 1 2 Lidia Cabral; Julia Weinstock (October 2010). "Brazil: an emerging aid player". ODI. Retrieved 28 May 2018.
  99. ↑ Cabral, Lidia (21 July 2010). "Brazil's development cooperation with the South: a global model in waiting". ODI. Retrieved 28 May 2018.
  100. ↑ Garrett, Laurie. 2007. The Challenge of Global Health. Foreign Affairs 86 (1):14-38]
  101. ↑ Collier, Paul (2007). The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries Are failing and What Can Be Done about It. Oxford.
  102. ↑ Kenny, Charles (September 2006). What is effective aid? How would donors allocate it? (PDF) (Report). World Bank. Retrieved 2021-03-05.
  103. ↑ "Effective development co-operation - OECD". www.oecd.org. Retrieved 2019-07-04.
  104. ↑ See OECD, "The Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness". March 2, 2005.
  105. ↑ "Comprehensive thinking". Archived from the original on 2010-07-06. Retrieved 2010-03-11.
  106. ↑ OECD, "The Accra Agenda For Action", 3rd High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, September 4, 2008.
  107. ↑ OECD, "The Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness". March 2, 2005.
  108. ↑ Kharas, H., "Transparency: Changing the Accountability Engagement, and Effectiveness of Aid", in: Kharas, H., Makino, K., Jung, W., "Catalyzing Development", Brookings Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 2011.
  109. ↑ Bjorkman, M., Svensson, J., "Power to the People: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experience on Community-Based Monitoring in Uganda", Quarterly Journal of Economics 124, no. 2: 735-69, 2009.
  110. ↑ Mary Robinson’s definition, in the OECD Survey on Monitoring The Paris Declaration, 2008.
  111. ↑ See Kharas, H., "Transparency: Changing the Accountability Engagement, and Effectiveness of Aid", in: Kharas, H., Makino, K., Jung, W., "Catalyzing Development", Brookings Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 2011.
  112. ↑ Majone, G. "The new European Agencies: regulation by information", Journal of European Public Policy 4, no. 2: 262-75, 1997.
  113. ↑ See, for example, Pranay, S., and Hubbard, M., "A Future for Aid Data: Research towards a South-South Cooperation Data Categorization to complement on-going IATI Categorizations’", ongoing research, DFID Future of Aid and Beyond Research Competition 2010-11, 2011.
  114. ↑ Kharas, H., Makino, K., Jung, W., "Catalyzing Development", Brookings Institution Press, Washington, D.C. 2011.
  115. ↑ See Droop, J., Isenman, P., and Mlalazi, B., "Mutual accountability in Aid Effectiveness: International-Level Mechanisms", Briefing Note, n.3, Oxford Policy Management, 2008.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.