Search

As NGOs have emerged as arguably the most prominent actors within the global development enterprise, their international activities and presence have grown to represent a key area of inquiry for development scholars. Existing literature on the geographic distribution of development NGOs leans heavily on quantitative analysis, which lends little insight into the deeper motivations behind the location-based decisions that these organizations make; this study uses a qualitative lens to fill this gap, shedding light on the question "Why do NGOs work where they do"? After interviewing representatives from 22 Canadian development NGOs, the research team determined several key catalysts, which shape the geography of these entities. These factors include existing relationships, personal visits, local requests, logistical ease, funder restrictions, documented need, and humanitarian crises. Furthermore, the decision-making framework related to project locations appears to evolve as organizations grow. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While existing research has suggested that delegating foreign aid allocation decisions to a multilateral aid fund may incentivize recipient countries to invest in bureaucratic quality, our analysis links the fund's decision rules to recipient-country investment by explicitly modeling the decision-making within multilateral aid funds. We find that majority rule induces stronger competition between recipients, resulting in higher investments in bureaucratic quality. Despite this advantage, unanimity can still be optimal since the increased investment under majority comes at the cost of low aid allocation to countries in the minority. The qualitative predictions of our model rationalize our novel empirical finding that, relative to organizations that use a consensus rule, organizations that use majority are more responsive to changes in recipient-country quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores whether IMF-supported programs in low-income countries (LICs) catalyze Official Development Assistance (ODA). Based on a comprehensive set of ODA measures and using the Propensity Score Matching approach to address selection bias, we show that programs addressing policy or exogenous shocks have a significant catalytic impact on both the size and the modality of ODA. Moreover, for gross disbursements the impact is greatest when LICs are faced with substantial macroeconomic imbalances or large shocks. Results indicate a sharp difference between the responsiveness of multilateral and bilateral donors to programs. While multilateral donors significantly raise their gross and net disbursements to program countries, the aid allocation by bilateral donors, on both a gross and net basis, does not seem to be affected by programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Wealthy countries spend increasing amounts of aid to support adaptation to climate change in developing countries and have committed under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change to prioritize adaptation aid to those 'particularly vulnerable' to climate change. While research has started to track this aid, it has not yet examined its allocation across all donor and recipient countries. We thus do not know to what extent vulnerable countries indeed receive more support for adaptation. We address this research gap and ask: how does this commitment to prioritizing particularly vulnerable countries translate into actual adaptation aid allocation? To what extent do vulnerable countries receive more adaptation aid? We address these questions though a quantitative analysis of data from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development on bilateral adaptation aid from 2011 through 2014. In contrast to other studies, we find that vulnerability-or more precisely, vulnerability indicators-matter for adaptation aid allocation. Countries that are more exposed to climate change risks, such as extreme weather events or sea level rise, receive more adaptation aid, both on a per capita basis and as a percentage of all adaptation aid. These results indicate that collectively (even if not at the level of each individual donor) donors align their bilateral adaptation aid allocation with global promises. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We assess whether bilateral and multilateral donors of foreign aid specialized and coordinated their activities with other donors as agreed in the Paris Declaration of 2005. We account for donor heterogeneity, varying aid priorities and recipient characteristics in order to isolate changes in donor behaviour over time. Recent shifts in aid priorities, such as the rising importance of general budget support, have reduced the fragmentation of aid. Nevertheless, our results reveal that aid fragmentation persisted after the Paris Declaration and coordination among donors has even weakened. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the ability of Board members of the most important multilateral donor to developing countries, the International Development Association (IDA) of the World Bank, to influence IDA allocations toward their home countries. I show that a system of Bank staff ratings of individual countries' policies, which has become more important in IDA lending over time, has systematically reduced the informal power of Board members. I show that while IDA Board members received more IDA commitments than their counterparts prior to 1989, this influence has disappeared since, as the importance of the policy index has increased. The findings are robust to the inclusion of fixed effects and a variety of relevant controls. In order to further support my argument, I also investigate the influence of Board membership on the Bank's policy index itself. I am unable to establish any positive relationship between Board membership and the index, either during the Cold War or afterwards. The findings not only shed important light on the internal workings of World Bank allocations to poor countries, but also highlight the ways in which institutional designs can affect the balance of informal power in international institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We analyze the aid portfolio of various bilateral and multilateral donors, testing whether they have prioritized aid in line with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Employing Tobit models that combine sectorally disaggregated aid data with various indicators reflecting the situation of recipient countries regarding the MDGs, we show that donors differ in the extent to which their sectoral aid allocation is conducive to achieving major MDGs. Some MDGs, notably the fight against HIV/AIDS, have shaped the allocation of aid. However, with respect to other MDGs such as primary education, there is a considerable gap between donor rhetoric and actual aid allocation. This invites the conclusion that the current focus on substantially increasing aid is unlikely to have the desired effects unless the targeting of aid is improved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the influence of Japan and the United States over the geographic distribution of Asian Development Bank funds. Estimation using panel data for less developed Asian countries from 1968 to 2002 suggests significant donor influence with inconsistent weight placed on humanitarian criteria given limited funding for the region's largest countries, China and India. Comparing the results with research on World Bank loan allocation suggests donor interests are relatively more important in the ADB. This finding justifies the existence of the ADB on political grounds but calls into question its relative merits on economic grounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]