A Comparative Analysis of Aid Policies for Human Resource Development: United States and Japan.

Official Development Assistance (ODA) is an increasingly important part of foreign aid budgets. Countries that offer foreign aid to other nations do so for many, often contradictory reasons that range from national security and economic self-interest to humanitarian concerns. Every donor state uses ODA as an instrument of its foreign policy. This paper describes findings of a study that examined the relationship between Japan's and the United States' officially stated foreign-aid objectives and the trainees who participate in the two countries' programs. The study analyzed the links between aid flows and policy positions by determining the correlation between numbers of participating trainees by recipient country and three possible donor policy indicators. The data indicate that neither the Japanese nor the United States' participant-training practices match their official foreign policy objectives. Despite changes in policy to emphasize humanitarian interests, Japan offers trainee opportunities to its trading partners significantly more often than to other developing countries. Neither of the agencies that administer training programs in Japan reflect humanitarian policy objectives. The United States adheres to a humanitarian policy as part of its development-assistance statements; however, the data show that the United States trains more people from countries with large gross national products (GNPs) per capita than from countries with smaller GNPs. Additionally, the participant-trainee programs do not reflect the United States' stated foreign-policy objective of promoting economic interests. Six tables are included. (Contains 11 references.) (LMI)