How new is the ‘new’ conditionality? Recipient perspectives on aid, country ownership and policy reform

Dornan, Matthew

doi:10.1111/dpr.12245

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…He argues that budget support and related endeavours allow this type of close engagement, because they allow donors to become intimately involved in fiscal processes. In the Solomon Islands, Tonga and Tuvalu, Dornan (2017) argues that donors have used budget support to leverage specific policy reforms.…”

Section: The Rise and Fall Of Budget Support As Popular Aid Modalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The rise and fall of budget support: Ownership, bargaining and donor commitment problems in foreign aid

Swedlund¹,

Lierl

2020

Development Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motivation: Budget support is the form of aid most commonly associated with recipient-country ownership. However, a number of scholars and practitioners have criticized the approach as masking new forms of conditionality. Was budget support simply a guise for increasing donor influence in recipient countries? How can we explain the rapid shift towards budget support, as well as the rapid decline in its popularity after only a few years? Purpose: We use a bargaining framework to explain the rise and fall of budget support. Contrary to explanations that suggest that budget support was a normative decision by donors designed to increase aid effectiveness by fostering ownership, a bargaining framework emphasizes that aid policy is the result of sustained negotiations between donors and recipients. These negotiations, however, are constrained by donors' inability to deliver aid as promised. Approach: We use a Nash bargaining framework to formalize the predictions of a bargaining model. From the model, two testable predictions emerge: (1) in exchange for more credible commitments, recipient governments are willing to selectively offer donor agencies greater access to and influence over domestic policy decision-making; and (2) in exchange for such influence, donor agencies are willing to exert less pressure on recipients to be politically inclusive. We then test the implications of the model using case-study evidence from Rwanda and Tanzania. Findings: The empirical data, based on over 80 interviews with practitioners over several periods of research in both countries, provide substantial evidence in support of the model's core assumptions and predictions. Contrary to claims that budget support increased recipient-country ownership, interviews (identified as personal communications) suggest that, in exchange for more credible commitments, recipient governments were willing to grant donors greater access and influence. In return, donor agencies reduced demands on the recipient government regarding political inclusivity, tacitly accepting arrangements that centralized decision-making and excluded civil society. When donor agencies could no longer provide budget support as promised, these negotiated arrangements broke down. Policy Implications: The findings challenge a common narrative that donors embraced budget support because of a normative commitment to ownership. They also demonstrate the value of a bargaining framework.

show abstract

Section: The Rise and Fall Of Budget Support As Popular Aid Modalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The rise and fall of budget support: Ownership, bargaining and donor commitment problems in foreign aid

Swedlund¹,

Lierl

2020

Development Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Overton et al () highlight the agency exercised by Pacific Islanders in managing foreign aid flows. Dornan () examines conditionality and the limits to policy influence that donors exercise. There have also been studies of aid program changes on the donor side, the most relevant of which examine changes to Australia's and New Zealand's aid programs (see Banks et al () for a study of changes in New Zealand, and Corbett (), Corbett and Dinnen (), Day (), and Wood et al () for studies of changes to foreign aid in Australia).…”

Section: Literature On Aid In the Pacificmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Murray and Overton () argue that such changes have reduced sovereignty of Pacific island countries. Dornan () is more optimistic and notes some improvements. Below, we use the quantitative data that are available to explore changes to foreign aid provided in the region over this period, focusing on variables that can be measured.…”

Section: Analysis Of Foreign Aid In the Pacificmentioning

confidence: 99%

Foreign Aid to the Pacific: Trends and Developments in the Twenty‐First Century

Dornan

Pryke

2017

Asia & Pacific Policy Stud

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Pacific islands is one of the most aiddependent regions in the world. This article examines developments in the delivery of foreign aid to the region since the year 2000, a period in which there has been considerable change in both the amount and way in which aid is delivered internationally. Although Pacific island countries have seen a scale-up in development assistance, it has been modest relative to that enjoyed by other developing countries. Improvement has been mixed in areas identified as a concern by the aid effectiveness agenda, with high levels of volatility and lack of predictability particularly problematic.

show abstract

“…Whitfield (2009a, p. 4) observed that the popularity of ownership in development diplomacy may be precisely because it is challenging to define, thereby obfuscating debates around decision‐making processes in development policy. The same may be observed in the academic realm, with contributions variously emphasizing ownership as developing country leadership (Graham, 2017; Booth, 2012), broad‐based consensus (Faust, 2010) or participation (Dornan, 2017). Building on Whitfield and Fraser’s (2010) observation that ownership may be expressed and pursued as commitment and control, a recent study suggested that ownership should be viewed as encompassing both the substance and process of co‐operation.…”

Section: Defining and Researching Ownershipmentioning

confidence: 74%

Special issue introduction Ownership in a post‐aid effectiveness era: Comparative perspectives

Keijzer

Black

2020

Development Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Motivation: Close to 15 years have passed since the adoption of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, which generated unprecedented efforts to advance effective development co-operation with a central focus on developing country ownership. Under today's international development co-operation realities, involving inclusive agendas, strategic divergence and increasing competition, discussions on ownership, harmonization and alignment have lost traction. Yet the practices of development co-operation relationships show strong continuities. Purpose: This special issue examines how the principle of ownership may be understood and advanced under these new conditions. National ownership is prioritized in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development yet has so far been marginalized by a predominantly piecemeal response and by the rise of "mutual benefit" co-operation. Approach and Methods: This special issue takes an inductive approach to studying specific cases and actors bearing on the challenge of understanding and advancing ownership today, in order to inform future policy and research. The contributions to this special issue mainly draw from qualitative research designs that present detailed research inquiries into specific country and actor cases, drawing from interviews, structured desk reviews of policy documents and the rich body of literature on development effectiveness. They are complemented by two contributions that respectively present quantitative research and probe the critical and post-development literature for additional insights. Findings: Findings point to an increasing prevalence of pragmatism and self-interest among all actors, to the detriment of national ownership. Broad co-operation agendas, a sense of urgency interpreted as a search for quick results, and more diverse, interest-and outcome-driven forms of multistakeholder partnerships all entail a more assertive and proactive approach on the part of external actors. Under these conditions, local initiative may either become stifled or be reasoned away. Given this, today's dominant approaches to co-operation raise concerns about their ethics and sustainability. Policy implications: Ownership remains both a requirement and a desired outcome of international co-operation and is key to the effective O2 | KEIJZER and BLaCK

show abstract

How new is the ‘new’ conditionality? Recipient perspectives on aid, country ownership and policy reform

Cited by 18 publications

References 22 publications

The rise and fall of budget support: Ownership, bargaining and donor commitment problems in foreign aid

The rise and fall of budget support: Ownership, bargaining and donor commitment problems in foreign aid

Foreign Aid to the Pacific: Trends and Developments in the Twenty‐First Century

Special issue introduction Ownership in a post‐aid effectiveness era: Comparative perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About