Search results

The purpose of this study is to shed light on donors’ decision process in their choice of aid recipients, which is still only partly understood. In particular, it is still unclear whether any imitative behaviour within donors’ decision process actually affects the degree of selectivity in their choice of recipients. This study contributes to fill such a gap by assessing whether the selectivity of donors’ aid allocation reflects an imitative behaviour and, if so, who leads the game and how the game has changed over time.

Donors’ selectivity is estimated using the Suits index for the analysis of aid allocations. The evolution of the Suits index is analysed in an autoregressive manner to test whether donors’ selectivity reflects an imitative behaviour.

This study documents a general increase in aid selectivity with regards to poverty, while selectivity according to governance reveals only limited change. The analysis shows how a redistributive process of donor leadership and influential power over aid allocation has been in place over three decades between 1980 and 2010, with the 1990s signing the main phase of transition.

This study contributes to shed light on donor coordination through the identification of leaders and followers among donors in terms of aid selectivity.

In this paper, we analyse and provide an overview of the functions the state aid in Kosovo and demonstrate their compliance with EU rules in fidls of state aid Article 107(3)(b) TFEU. We deal with the level of implementation of state aid rules by Kosovo institutions, especially Kosovo’s Commission for State Aid. We provide an overview of the State of Kosovo in fulfilling its obligation on state aid issues based on the Stabilisation and Association Agreement and others documents, which is a step forward for EU integration. We do this by conducting a comparative analysis of the data collected from both primary and secondary sources to demonstrate the current situation on state aid in Kosovo and determine the most appropriate means to build a strong and efficient National State Aid Commission. Findings from the study show that Kosovo Aid Commission is still in a development phase, and more needs to be done to create an adequate state aid regime. We propose measures to ensure the effective implementation of the state aid law.

This paper aims to assess whether official development assistance (ODA) or foreign aid has been effective in reducing extreme poverty; test whether the type and source of aid matter; and examine whether political or economic freedom enhances aid effectiveness in developing countries.

The study uses recent dynamic panel estimation techniques (system generalised method of moments), including those methods which deal with endogeneity by controlling for simultaneity and unobserved heterogeneity.

The main findings of the study are: firstly, foreign aid does have a statistically significant poverty reduction effect and the results are consistent across all the three extreme poverty proxies. Secondly, the disaggregation of aid by source and type shows that total aid, grant and bilateral aid are more likely to reduce poverty. Thirdly, political freedom might not be an effective channel through which aid impacts extreme poverty, but aid is more effective in an environment where there is respect for freedom of enterprise.

As with most cross-country aid–growth–poverty dynamic panel data studies, the challenges of establishing robust causality and accounting for the unobserved country-specific heterogeneity remain apparent. However, given the data availability constraints, generalised method of moments is, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, the most robust empirical strategy when T < N. Future research could explore possibilities of individual country analysis, disaggregating countries by income and also examining the direction of causality between foreign aid, poverty and democracy.

The policy implications are that the development partners should continue to focus on poverty reduction as the main objective for ODA; aid allocation should be focused on channels which have more poverty-reduction effect, such as per capita income and economic freedom; and aid recipient countries should also focus on reducing inequality.

The main social implications from this study is that it is possible to reduce poverty through ODA. Second, to enhance the effectiveness of foreign aid, ODA allocation should be focussed on channels, which have more poverty-reduction effect, and the host countries should have economic freedom.

This paper makes a further contribution to the aid effectiveness literature, especially the channels through which foreign aid affects poverty.

Like many other nations, the Government of Bangladesh (GoB) is having colossal difficulties managing the continuity of its development efforts in the milieu of COVID-19 pandemic. Widespread resource gap is evident for development budget due to significant diminution of revenue from readymade garments (RMG) and remittances, volatility in capital market, constant increase in trade deficit and reduction of foreign currency reserve, increase in debt and lack of investor confidence. A new horizon of relationship with development partners (DPs) will matter more than ever before. Regrettably, recent experience with collaborative mechanisms such as Local Consultative Group (LCG) and LCG Sector Working Group (LCG-WG) does not support high-impact relationships in terms of result-oriented development effectiveness. Arguably, the international shift of the development community from aid to development effectiveness agenda in 2011 also contributed to country-level motivation of Government and DPs for closer collaboration. In this backdrop, the COVID-19 crisis makes a strong call to both Government and DPs to change their business for improved development results. This chapter, therefore, examines the issues that impede development effectiveness and governance related to the Government as well as DPs. The study observe that the DPs and GoB don’t represent a horizontal relationship to implement the development effectiveness agenda in Bangladesh mainly because of dominant attitude, lack of alignment and harmonization and accountability of DPs and weak policy, institution and leadership of GoB. However, COVID-19 economic crisis makes a renewed call to both DPs and GoB implement the development effectiveness agenda, addressing existing issues and improve the management of development finance to increase economic growth and improve life of the people.

The paper discusses various important issues of development aid in the context of the emerging new landscape for Official Development Assistance (ODA) and in particular how aid effectiveness issues are now perceived in a world of scaled-up aid. The paper also discusses the overall nexus between aid, growth and domestic policies in aid-recipient countries by reflecting on the relevant ongoing debate in this area. A substantial part of the paper is devoted to the discussion of the central issues involved in development aid, particularly in connection with recent calls in the international development community for scaling-up aid so that the Millennium Development Goals can be attained, as well as the challenging new policy agenda in this regard.

Capacity development in fragile environments in Africa has often proven to be a complex undertaking. This has largely been because of existing knowledge gaps on what exactly causes fragility of states, the economy and society. The liberal peace development model that generally informs post‐conflict reconstruction and capacity development has a limited conception of fragility by narrowly focusing on the national dimensions of the problem, promoting donor‐driven solutions, emphasizing minimal participation of beneficiary actors in the identification and prioritization of capacity development needs, and by subcontracting the design and management of projects and programs. The resulting capacity development impact has generally been disappointing. In the absence of homegrown strategic plans, stakeholder participation and ownership, international development partners have all too often addressed capacity gaps by financing training, supply of equipment and professional exchanges of parliamentarians and parliamentary staffers. These efforts usually achieved their presumed number targets but tended to ignore addressing the larger issues of political economy within which capacity development take place. However, the recent re‐conceptualization of parliamentary capacity development as a development of nationally owned, coordinated, harmonized, and aligned development activities seems to be gaining growing attention in Africa. As the experience of Rwanda eloquently demonstrates, capacity development is essentially about politics, economics and power, institutions and incentives, habits and attitudes – factors that are only partly susceptible to technical fixes and quantitative specifications. These structural factors have to be negotiated carefully and tactfully.

This paper estimates the responsiveness of aid to recipient countries' economic and physical needs, civil/political rights, and government effectiveness. We look exclusively at the post-Cold War era and use fixed effects to control for the political, strategic, and other considerations of donors. We find that aid and per capita income have been negatively related, while aid has been positively related to infant mortality, rights, and government effectiveness.

This explorative study aims to compare and analyze the behavior of a traditional and an emerging donor, namely, Germany and South Korea, in the field of climate change-related official development assistance (ODA). It analyzes their ODA projects in 2013 in four Southeast Asian countries severely affected by climate change, namely, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam. It also adapts the existing framework to categorize ODA allocation according to receiving countries’ need and merit and donors’ self-interest.

The paper first describes both countries’ policies and activities. It then uses a country’s vulnerability to climate change as a measure of its need, its climate change readiness as a measure of its merit and its bilateral trade volume in environmental goods with donor countries as a measure of donors’ self-interest to analyze the allocation of climate-related ODA.

Results suggest that Korean ODA in the field of climate protection is driven more by receiving countries’ need and merit, but self-interest seems to be important for both donors. In addition, many projects labeled as adaptation or mitigation projects only have a weak link to these goals. There are limitations to the present paper. First, it could only analyze projects in 2013 because there are no earlier project data available in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s Creditor Reporting System. Second, because of the simplifying assumptions of the need–merit–self-interest framework, possible other determinants of aid allocation were deliberately ignored. Finally, this explorative study is restricted to four vulnerable countries in Southeast Asia.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper to compare a traditional and an emerging donor’s behavior and to explore the allocation of climate-related ODA using the need–merit–self-interest framework.

This paper sets up a model of strategic sovereign default, in which crony capitalism provides policymakers with incentives to service the debt beyond what is socially optimal. It then considers reforms to deal with the supply side of clientelism: the private sector. This involves tackling agency problems between managers and corporate stakeholders, since a key element to constrain the ability of powerful economic interests to capture the state is good corporate governance. Economic hard times provide such an opportunity, as the implicit coalition between groups of cronies may break down. A model is built along those lines, which highlights international contagion of debt repudiation.