The role of mercantilism, humanitarianism, and gaiatsu in Japan's ODA programme in Asia

Determinants of Foreign Aid: The Case of South Korea

“…S. Ayoub (2004) found that humanitarian perspectives as well as US strategic interests were major determinants of Japan's aDA allocation in Africa. Tuman and J. R. Strand (2006) and Tuman, Strand, and C. Emmert (2009) Alesina and Dollar (2000) and Berthelemy and Tichit (2004) is that, after analyzing the entire dataset, they broke it down by time horizon as well as by donor country.…”

“…McGillivray and E. Oczkowski (1991), Berthelerny and Tichit (2004), Dollar and Levin (2004), and J. Koo and D. Kim (2011) used the Tobit model, Tuman and Strand (2006) used the OLS model, and Alesina and Dollar (2000) utilized both models.…”

Donor influence in multilateral development banks: The case of the Asian Development Bank

“…1 In general, researchers have found geopolitical and commercial interests particularly important for the U.S. (Alesina & Dollar, 2000), commercial interests particularly important for Japan (Alesina & Dollar, 2000;Schraeder, Hook, & Taylor, 1998;Tuman & Ayoub, 2004;Tuman, Emmert, & Sterken, 2001;Tuman & Strand, 2006) and humanitarian concerns particularly important for small donors, namely Canada, the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Sweden (Alesina & Dollar, 2000;Stokke, 1989). 2 A number of studies of Japanese bilateral aid consider whether Japanese policy reacts to U.S. pressure (gaiatsu) with positive results for Africa (Hickman, 1993;Tuman & Ayoub, 2004), mixed findings for Latin America (Katada, 1997;Tuman et al, 2001) but no evidence in Asia (Tuman & Strand, 2006). Previous work on multilateral aid allocation finds more emphasis on recipient need as compared to bilateral aid as a whole (Burnside & Dollar, 2000;Alesina & Dollar, 2000).…”

Informal influence in the Asian Development Bank

“…One strand of the literature on Japanese bilateral aid explores Japanese policy as a reaction to U.S. pressure (gaiatsu). Hickman (1993) and Tuman and Ayoub (2004) find evidence of gaiatsu in the distribution of aid flows to Africa but results are mixed for Latin America (Katada 1997;Tuman et al 2001) and negative for Asia (Tuman and Strand 2006). Looking across regions, Tuman et al (2005) do find evidence of gaiatsu.…”

“…In the broader aid allocation literature, researchers have found geopolitical and commercial interests particularly important for the U.S. (Alesina and Dollar 2000), commercial interests central for Japan (Alesina and Dollar 2000;Dippel 2009;Schraeder et al 1998;Tuman and Ayoub 2004;Tuman et al 2001;Tuman and Strand 2006) and humanitarian concerns foremost for the "like-minded" donor countries, Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden (Alesina and Dollar 2000;Stokke 1989). One strand of the literature on Japanese bilateral aid explores Japanese policy as a reaction to U.S. pressure (gaiatsu).…”