Abstract
This chapter gives an overview of the international development landscape, in which the emerging powers have become important stakeholders, creating their own narratives on development cooperation and doing aid differently in a set-up created by the traditional donors. While traditional donors continue to provide most of the assistance, the presence of emerging powers has brought in new ideas and ways of aid-giving that either emerged from their own experience as a recipient or created in accordance with their priorities and preferences. Their foreign aid policies are not written in stone and have evolved over time with scope for ample change during the course of delivery and implementation. This brings in new dynamics into international foreign aid architecture, where emerging powers are bringing in the prospects of positive change in how aid has traditionally been understood. This chapter critically analyses the international bilateral aid architecture and how emerging powers are creating inroads into the system by playing both roles—as a donor as well as a recipient—which gives them the space and opportunity to experiment and evolve.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Humanitarian aid is provided by governments to those nations which have suffered natural disasters like floods or famines.
- 2.
Subsistence aid is given by governments to prevent the breakdown of law and order situation in a recipient country.
- 3.
Aid for military purposes is used by governments to build and strengthen their alliances. Apart from alliance building, military aid has been given for strategic reasons to even neutral countries depending on their strategic positioning in international politics.
- 4.
Prestige aid is a major form of assistance given mainly to the underdeveloped countries to build infrastructure projects like a highway, airport or a stadium which leads to increase in prestige of both the donor and the recipient. It is rather a show of modernity and power and not a conscious effort by donor to get economic or political dividends. However, donors have gained several political advantages including greater goodwill through their efforts in supporting such projects.
- 5.
This form of aid has been given based on the proposition that the developed countries have an obligation to support the economically deprived countries by taking them on the path of development.
- 6.
Project aid constitutes a grant or loan designated for a specific project or outcome.
- 7.
Programme aid is usually a policy-based loan given to create suitable economic conditions in recipient country.
- 8.
It involves providing equipment or experts for a specific sector or outcome.
- 9.
Food aid is given to those countries that suffer natural or man-made disasters, such as floods, famines and armed conflicts.
- 10.
It includes grants, materials and relief to meet the demands of the victims of any disaster.
- 11.
It is given to strengthen the military of the recipient governments. It is the least benign form of assistance.
- 12.
For instance, UK gives most part of its aid to its former colonies. Its maximum aid was being diverted to India, a former colony, until 2010. UK’s aid to India was reduced when New Delhi declared that it is not dependent on foreign aid. Since then, UK increased its aid to Pakistan and Bangladesh, both former colonies of UK (DFID 2015, 32). In 2018, Pakistan is the top recipient of UK aid at £331 million (DFID 2018).
- 13.
The US has a history of providing aid to countries it sees as strategic partners. For instance, its increasing aid to South Asia especially, Afghanistan and Pakistan.
- 14.
Initially, a target of 1% of aid from developed countries was recommended by the World Council of Churches in 1958. This was followed up by a proposal by Jan Tinbergen who was appointed as the Chairman of the United Nations Committee on Development Planning in 1964. Tinbergen proposed “a target of official flows of 0.75% of gross national product to be reached by 1972 based on the estimated capital inflows developing economies needed to achieve desirable growth rates” (OECD 2010, 1).
The Pearson Commission Report Partners in Development in 1969 proposed “a target of 0.7% of donor Gross National Product (GNP) which should be achieved by 1975 and in no case later than 1980”(OECD 2010, 2). In 1993, after the revised System of National Accounts, “gross national product was replaced by gross national income (GNI), an equivalent concept” (OECD 2010, 3).
- 15.
Only few States give aid according to the UN target of 0.7% GNI of which the most important are the Scandinavian countries that have continuously been trying to keep up the 0.7% mark.
- 16.
For a complete list of ODA recipients for reporting on aid in 2018 and 2019, see (OECD 2019c). The list is revised every three years and the next one is due in 2020.
- 17.
See, the High-level United Nations Conference on South-South Cooperation, held in Nairobi in 2009 at http://southsouthconference.org/.
- 18.
The First White Paper on Chinese Foreign Aid was published in 2011 and the second one in 2014.
References
Alesina, Alberto and Dollar, David. (2000), “Who Gives Foreign Aid to Whom and Why?”, Journal of Economic Growth, 5(1): 33–63.
Atwood, J.B, Manning, R. and Riegler, H. (2018), “Don’t Undermine the Basic Architecture of OECD/DAC Statistics: A Letter of Warning”, Brookings. Accessed at https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2018/12/21/dont-undermine-the-basic-architecture-of-oecd-dac-statistics-a-letter-of-warning/.
Aubut, Julie. (2004), The Good Governance Agenda: Who Wins and Who Loses. Some Empirical Evidence for 2001, LSE working Paper Series No. 04-48 [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www2.lse.ac.uk/internationalDevelopment/pdf/WP48.pdf.
Baldwin, D. (1966), Foreign Aid and American Foreign Policy: A Documentary Analysis, New York: Praeger.
Barder, Owen and Birdsall, Nancy. (2006), Payments for Progress: A Hands-Off Approach to Foreign Aid, Working Paper 102, Centre for Global Development [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.cgdev.org/content/publications/detail/11550/.
Bauer, P. (1991), The Development Frontier: Essays in Applied Economics, Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Cited in Aubut, Julie. (2004), The Good Governance Agenda: Who Wins and Who Loses, Some Empirical Evidence for 2001, LSE working Paper Series No. 04-48 [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www2.lse.ac.uk/internationalDevelopment/pdf/WP48.pdf.
Berthelemy, Jean-Claude and Tichit, Ariane. (2002), Bilateral Donor’s Aid Allocation Decisions: A Three Dimensional Panel Analysis, Discussion Paper No. 2002/123, World Institute of Development Economics Research, United Nations University, Finland [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.wider.unu.edu/stc/repec/pdfs/rp2002/dp2002-123.pdf.
Bird, Graham. (1999), “The Political Economy of Foreign Aid: Fatigue or Regeneration?”, Zagreb International Review of Economics and Business, 2(2): 1–24.
Boone, P. (1995), Politics and the Effectiveness of Foreign Aid, Discussion Paper No. 272, Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political Science, London [Online: web]. Accessed at http://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp0272.pdf.
Boone, P. (1996), “Politics and the Effectiveness of Foreign Aid”, European Economic Review, 40(2): 289–329.
Bourdieu, Pierre. (1990), The Logic of Practice, Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Brautigam, Deborah. (2009), The Dragon’s Gift: The Real Story of China in Africa, New York: Oxford University Press.
Brautigam, Deborah. (2010), China, Africa and the International Aid Architecture [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.american.edu/sis/faculty/upload/Rev-working-paper-china-africa-aid-architecture-August-2010.pdf.
Burnell, Peter. (1997), “The Changing Politics of Foreign Aid—Where to Next?”, Politics, 17(2): 117–125.
Burnell, Peter. (2004), The Domestic Political Impact of Foreign Aid: Recalibrating the Research Agenda, Working Paper [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.essex.ac.uk/ecpr/events/generalconference/marburg/papers/26/4/Burnell.pdf.
Chenery, Hollis B. and Strout, Alan M. (1966), “Foreign Assistance and Economic Development”, American Economic Review, 56 (4): 679–733.
Chhotray, Vasudha and Hulme, David. (2007), Contrasting Visions for Aid and Governance in the 21st Century: The White House Millennium Challenge Account and DFID’s Drivers of Change, Working Paper [Online: web]. Accessed at http://economics.ouls.ox.ac.uk/14023/1/gprg-wps-062.pdf.
Chisholm, Linda. (2009), “Introduction: Rhetoric, Realities, and Reasons”, in Chisholm, Linda and Steiner-Khamsi, Gita (eds.), South-South Cooperation in Education and Development, Teachers College Press: New York.
Collier, P. and Dollar, D. (1999), Aid Allocation and Poverty Reduction, Policy Research Working Paper No. 2041, World Bank, Washington, DC.
Collier, P. et al. (1997), “Redesigning Conditionality”, World Development, 25 (9): 1399–1407.
DFID. (2015), “Statistics on International Development 2015”. Accessed at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/482322/SID2015c.pdf.
DFID. (2018), “Final UK Aid Spend 2018”. Accessed at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/832541/Statistics-on-International-Development-final-aid-spend-2018.pdf.
Doornbos, M. (2001), “Good Governance: The Rise and Decline of a Policy Metaphor?”, The Journal of Development Studies, 37(6): 93–108.
Dreher, Axel et al. (2010), Are ‘New’ Donors Different? Comparing the Allocation of Bilateral Aid Between Non-DAC and DAC Donor Countries, CEGE Discussion Paper No. 96 [Online: web]. Accessed at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1574789.
ECOSOC. (2014), “Trends and Progress in International Development Cooperation”, Report of the Secretary-General, High level Segment: Development Cooperation Forum, United Nations Economic and Social Council [Online: web]. Accessed at https://www.un.org/ecosoc/sites/www.un.org.ecosoc/files/publication/n1440507.pdf.
Erixon, Fredrik. (2005), “Aid and Development: Will It Work This Time?”, The Jamestown Foundation [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.policynetwork.net/development/publication/aid-and-development.
Fraser, Alastair. (2006), Aid-Recipient Sovereignty in Global Governance, Working Paper [Online: web]. Accessed at http://cambridge.academia.edu/AlastairFraser/Papers/254/Aid_recipient_Sovereignty_in_Historical_Context#Share.
Griffin, K.B. and Enos, J.L. (1970), “Foreign Assistance: Objectives and Consequences”, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 18(3): 313–327.
Gilpin, R. (1987), The Political Economy of International Relations, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hansen, Henrik and Tarp, Finn. (2000), “Aid Effectiveness Disputed”, Journal of International Development, 12(3): 375–398.
Hattori, Tomohisa. (2001), “Reconceptualizing Foreign Aid”, Review of International Political Economy, 8(4): 633–660.
Hook, Steven W. (1998), “Building Democracy Through Foreign Aid: The Limitations of United States Political Conditionalities, 1992–96”, Democratization, 5(3): 156–180.
Hopkins, Raymond F. (2000), “Political Economy of Foreign Aid” [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/rhopkin1/research/PolEconFA.pdf.
Hoy, Paula. (1998), Players and Issues in International Aid, Sterling, VA: Kumarian Press.
Kragelund, Peter. (2010), The Potential Role of Non-traditional Donors’ Aid in Africa, Issue Paper No. 11, ICTSD [Online: web]. Accessed at http://ictsd.org/downloads/2010/03/the-potential-role-of-non-traditional-donorse28099-aid-in-africa.pdf.
Lensink, Robert and White, Howard. (2000a), “Assessing Aid: A Manifesto for Aid in the 21st Century?”, Oxford Development Studies, 28(1): 5–18.
Liska, G. (1960). The New Statecraft: Foreign Aid in American Foreign Policy, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lumsdaine, David. (1993), Moral Vision in International Politics: The Foreign Aid Regime, 1949–1989, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Mawdsley, E. (2012), From Recipients to Donors: Emerging Powers and the Changing Development Landscape, London: Zed Books.
Minch, Kevin J. (2010), “Bilateral Vs Multilateral Aid”, International Debate Education Association [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.idebate.org/debatabase/topic_details.php?topicID=392.
Morgenthau, Hans. (1962), “A Political Theory of Foreign Aid”, The American Political Science Review, 56(2): 301–309.
Mosley, Paul et al. (2004), “Aid, Poverty Reduction and the ‘New Conditionality’”, The Economic Journal, 114 (496): F217–F243.
Nel, Philip. (2010), “Redistribution and Recognition: What Emerging Regional Powers Want?”, Review of International Studies, 36(4): 951–974.
Neumayer, E. (2003), The Pattern of Aid Giving: The Impact of Good Governance on Development Assistance, Routledge: New York.
O’Keefe, Joseph. (2007), “Aid—From Consensus to Competition?”, The Brookings Blum Roundtable [Online: web], Accessed at http://www.brookings.edu/global/aspen/2007o%27keefe.pdf.
ODI. (2010), Brazil: An Emerging Aid Player, Briefing Paper 64 [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/5120.pdf.
OECD. (1995), Participatory Development and Good Governance, Development Co-operation Guideline Series, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/27/13/31857685.pdf.
OECD. (2008), “Is it ODA?”, Factsheet [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/documentupload/IsitODA.pdf.
OECD. (2010), “History of the 0.7% ODA Target” [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.oecd.org/investment/stats/45539274.pdf.
OECD. (2016a), “History of DAC Lists of Aid Recipient Countries” [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/historyofdaclistsofaidrecipientcountries.htm.
OECD. (2016b), “Members and Partners” [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.oecd.org/about/membersandpartners/.
OECD. (2019a). “ODA 2018 Preliminary Figures.” Accessed at http://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/official-development-assistance.htm.
OECD. (2019b), “Development Aid Drops in 2018, Especially to Neediest Countries.” Accessed at http://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-data/ODA-2018-detailed-summary.pdf.
OECD. (2019c), “DAC List of ODA Recipients.” Accessed at http://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/DAC-List-of-ODA-Recipients-for-reporting-2018-and-2019-flows.pdf.
OECD. (2019d), “What Is ODA?”. Accessed at https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/What-is-ODA.pdf.
Pronk, Jan. (2001), “Aid as a Catalyst”, Development and Change, 32(4): 611–629.
Pronk, Jan et al. (2004), Catalysing Development? A Debate on Aid, Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Radelet, Steve. (2006), A Primer on Foreign Aid, Working Paper 92 [Online: web] Accessed at www.cgdev.org/files/8846_file_WP92.pdf.
Riddell, R.C. (1996), “The Moral Case for Post-Cold War Development Aid”, International Journal, 51(2): 191–210.
Sato, Jin et al. (2010), How do “Emerging” Donors Differ from “Traditional” Donors? An Institutional Analysis of Foreign Aid in Cambodia, Working Paper, JICA [Online: web]. Accessed at http://jica-ri.jica.go.jp/JICA-RI_WP_No.2_2010.pdf.
Schirm, Stefan A. (2006), Leadership in Regional and Global Politics: Why Do Emerging Powers (Sometimes) Fail to Reach Their Goals?, Working Paper, GIGA [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.sowi.rub.de/mam/content/lsip/leadership_paper.pdf.
Schraeder, P.J., Hook, S.W. and Taylor, B. (1998) “Clarifying the Foreign Aid Puzzle: A Comparison of American, Japanese, French and Swedish Flows”, World Politics, 50(2): 294–323.
Scott, S. (2019), “A Note on Current Problems with ODA as a Statistical Measure”, Brookings. Accessed at https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2019/09/26/a-note-on-current-problems-with-oda-as-a-statistical-measure/.
Sidaway, J. (2012), “Geographies of Development: New Maps, New Visions?”, Professional Geographer, 64(2): 1–14.
Six, C. (2009), “The Rise of Post-colonial States as Donors: A Challenge to the Development Paradigm?”, Third World Quarterly, 30(6): 1103–1121.
Sotero, Paulo. (2009), “Emerging Powers: India, Brazil And South Africa (IBSA) and the Future of South-South Cooperation”, Woodrow Wilson International Centre for Scholars [Online: web]. Accessed at http://www.wilsoncenter.org/topics/pubs/IBSA%20Publication.pdf.
Tarp, Finn. (2006), “Aid and development”, Swedish Economic Policy Review, 13(2): 9–61.
UN. (2010), “Nairobi Outcome Document of the High-level United Nations Conference on South-South Cooperation”, United Nations General Assembly A/RES/64/222, 64th Session, Agenda item 68(b). Accessed at http://ssc.undp.org/content/dam/ssc/documents/Key%20Policy%20Documents/Nairobi%20Outcome%20Document.pdf.
UN. (2019), “Report of the Second High-Level United Nations Conference on South-South Cooperation”, United Nations. Accessed at https://www.unsouthsouth.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/N1920949.pdf.
UNDP. (2010), “Nairobi Outcome Document.” Accessed at http://ssc.undp.org/content/dam/ssc/documents/Key%20Policy%20Documents/Nairobi%20Outcome%20Document.pdf.
UNOSSC. (2016a), “Background” [Online: web]. Accessed at http://ssc.undp.org/content/ssc/about/Background.html.
UNOSSC. (2016b), “What Is South-South Cooperation?”, United Nations Office for South-South Cooperation [Online: web]. Accessed at http://ssc.undp.org/content/ssc/about/what_is_ssc.html.
van de Walle, Nicolas (1999), “Aid’s Crisis of Legitimacy: Current Proposals and Future Prospects”, African Affairs, 98(392): 337–352.
Woods, Ngaire (2008), “Whose Aid? Whose Influence? China, Emerging Donors and the Silent Revolution in Development Assistance”, International Affairs, 84(6): 1205–1221.
World Bank. (1992), Governance and Development, Washington, DC: World Bank.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Purushothaman, C. (2021). The Evolving Bilateral Aid Architecture. In: Emerging Powers, Development Cooperation and South-South Relations. International Political Economy Series. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51537-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51537-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-51536-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-51537-9
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)