Interest-Based Development Cooperation: Moving Providers from Parochial Convergence to Principled Collaboration

Abstract

The motives for providing development assistance change according to historical and political trajectories but always combine varying degrees of altruism and selfishness. Currently, we are witnessing disruptive change in development cooperation as political leaders forward an increasingly self-regarding rationale for international assistance. In an empirical analysis of Northern donors’ narratives and aid allocation strategies, we define the meaning of the “national interest” in development cooperation and distinguish its principled and parochial formats. Our empirical analysis suggests Northern donors continue to allocate based on principled norms, though there is a noticeable deterioration in their public spiritedness as they simultaneously seek short-term domestic benefits from overseas giving. Calls for a principled national interest narrative may, however, enable normative collaboration across Northern and Southern actors.

Development narratives in a post-aid era: Reflections on implications for the global effectiveness agenda

“…Over the last decade, a transactional concept of development as a win-win that accrues to all nations, irrespective of their size or power, encouraged greater consideration of the domestic advantages that development can bring. Nationalist narratives are positioned within such a strong interest-based conceptualization of development (Gulrajani and Silcock 2020;Gulrajani and Calleja 2021). While the national interest has always been an important motivation for development, contemporary nationalist narratives emerged in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, where fiscal constraints in many wealthy countries put downward domestic pressure on development budgets.…”

Partner country selection between development narratives and self‐interests: A new method for analysing complex donor approaches

“…A commodity is deemed global if it provides a benefit beyond nation‐state borders, or if the provision of said commodity is cross‐border financed or otherwise supplied (Kaul, Blondin & Nahtigal, 2016; Klingebiel, 2018). Several other recent discussions on Principled Aid (suggested by Gulrajani & Calleja, 2019) and Global Public Investments (Glennie, 2020) overlap with the GPG discussion: they emphasise the GPGs’ character of related international cooperation approaches. It is important to underline that those debates differ from the traditional aid motivation debate which was mainly assuming a rather clear cut between self‐interests of donors and development needs of PCs.…”

Yükselmekte Olan Bi̇r Ekonomi̇ Türki̇ye İle Küçük Bi̇r Ada Ekonomi̇si̇ Olan Kuzey Kibris'in Ekonomi̇k İli̇şki̇leri̇ni̇n İncelenmesi̇: Diş Yardim Ve İkti̇dar Parti̇leri̇ni̇n İdeoloji̇si̇

“…Foreign aid, without a doubt, encourages the pursuit, promotion, and protection of the donor country's national interests. According to Gulrajani and Calleja (2019), no country would offer help unless it was representing, or at the very least be respectful of, its own concerns and goals. Dreher et.…”