Advertisement

Crime, Law and Social Change

, Volume 58, Issue 5, pp 483–494 | Cite as

Lost in transaction. Ensuring the deliverables in development aid

  • Luís de SousaEmail author
  • Raquel Freitas
Article

Abstract

This symposium explores some of the dilemmas of aid funding and the challenges that aid agencies face when defining and implementing aid policies that are mindful of anti-corruption concerns. There are tensions between aid flows, state capacity and development needs that require special attention from donors and raise the ultimate question whether aid is the solution or part of the problem. In other words, does aid improve the lives of peoples in recipient countries or does it help to breed more governance problems? There are equally a series of issues concerning corruption control that need clarifying. What strategies to fight corruption associated to the different aid modalities have been implemented by donors and how successful have these been? These and other questions will be addressed in this publication from different professional and disciplinary angles.

Keywords

Recipient Country Donor Agency Partner Country Debt Relief Development Assistance Committee 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Cooksey, B. (1999). Corruption in aid: do aid agencies have a comparative advantage in fighting corruption in Africa?’, paper presented at the Dissemination Workshop on Corruption and Poverty hosted by International Center for Economic Growth at the Regency Centre, Grand Regency Hotel, Nairobi Kenya on 3 November 1999. Reference: CON.111999.002 COR.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Booth, D., & Fritz, V. (2008) Good governance, aid modalities and poverty reduction. From better theory to better practice. Research Series 3, February, CDD-Ghana, ESRF, ODI, CMI.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    De Sousa, L., Hindess, B., & Larmour, P. (2009). Governments, NGOs and anti-corruption: The new integrity warriors. London: Routledge/ECPR Studies in European Political Science.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fritz, V., & Kolstad, I. (2008). Corruption and aid modalities. U4 ISSUE 4:2008, Bergen: Chr. Michelsen Institute. Available online: http://www.cmi.no/publications/file/3102-corruption-and-aid-modalities.pdf. Consulted 4 February 2011.
  5. 5.
    Newby, T. M. J. (2010). Unintended Effects of Development Aid – a brief overview. DIIS Working Paper, 2010/06. Available online: http://www.diis.dk/graphics/Publications/WP2010/WP2010-06_Unintended_Effects_Aid_web.pdf. Consulted 4 February 2011.
  6. 6.
    Rakner, L., & Wang, V. (2007). Governance assessments and the Paris Declaration. CMI Report 2007/10, Bergen: Chr. Michelsen Institute.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    TI – Transparency International (2010) Preventing corruption in humanitarian operations. Handbook of Good Practices. Berlin: TI Publications. Available online: http://www.transparency.org/publications/publications/humanitarian_handbook_feb_2010. Consulted 4 February 2011.
  8. 8.
    USAID (2005) USAID Anti-Corruption Strategy. Washington D.C.: USAID Publications (Reference: PD-ACA-557)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instituto de Ciências Sociais da Universidade de LisboaLisboaPortugal
  2. 2.Centro de Investigação e Estudos de Sociologia, ISCTE-IULLisboaPortugal

Personalised recommendations