In 2003, the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs undertook a decentralisation of the management of bilateral aid to the embassies in major partner countries. However, while decentralisation appears to live up to the principles of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, the specific delegation of responsibilities as well as the political context of aid management may jeopardise the intended contribution to effective development co‐operation. This article explores some factors potentially limiting the usefulness of decentralised aid management in the Danish case, and discusses certain intra‐organisational dynamics and extra‐organisational pressures influencing ‘donor effectiveness’.

Questioning diffusion and translation as central concepts describing how norms influence policies, the article analyses the drafting process of a recent gender equality policy in Danish development cooperation. Three global norms (gender mainstreaming, sexual and reproductive health and rights, and women’s empowerment) and their influence on the policy are examined, and it is argued that the contingency of policymaking circumscribes the role of global norms. A variety of intra- and extra-organizational factors affect the drafting of the policy, and it is the interaction between these factors and the norms, rather than diffusion or translation of global norms, that best describes the normative influence on Danish gender equality policy.

No abstract

Contemporary development cooperation is characterized by an increasing tension between a growing diversity of actors and significant attempts at homogenizing development practices through global norms prescribing 'good development'. This special issue shows empirically how diverse development organizations engage with global norms on gender equality. To understand this diversity of norm-engagement conceptually, this introductory article proposes four explanatory dimensions: (i) organizational history, culture and structures; (ii) actor strategies, emotions and relationships; (iii) organizational pressures and priorities; and (iv) the normativeenvironment and stakeholders. We argue that, while development organizations cannot avoid addressing global norms regarding gender equality, they do so in considerably divergent ways. However, the differences are explained less by whether these organizations constitute 'new' or 'old' donors than by the four identified dimensions.

No abstract