BRICS and Foreign Aid

Asmus, Gerda; Fuchs, Andreas; Müller, Angelika

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3027620

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 84 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results thus offer some empirical evidence to arguments suggesting that Northern donors are gradually seeking to use development cooperation within BASIC countries to secure geopolitical and commercial benefits in the image of Southern providers (Asmus et al, 2017;Bracho, 2015;Fejerskov, Lundsgaarde, & Cold-Ravnkilde, 2016). The Emerging countries express support for relationships with DAC donors evolve towards trade and cooperation for mutual benefit, cooperation through regional and multilateral forum, and knowledge exchange and mutual learning (Davies & Pickering, 2015, p. 42).…”

Section: The Wider Significance Of Donor Transitions In Basic Countsupporting

confidence: 51%

“…Their ability to privilege geostrategic interests over needs-based considerations is sometimes justified by their low per capita income and the need to convince domestic constituencies of the benefits of tackling underdevelopment beyond their borders (Asmus et al, 2017, p. 7;Mawdsley, 2019). Non-DAC donors potentially gain commercial advantages through the modalities of their development spending that DAC donors simply cannot access (Asmus et al, 2017). For example, development finance flows are often tied to exports and strongly linked to trade and investment interests (Fuchs, Dreher, & Nunnenkamp, 2014;Gulrajani & Swiss, 2018;Swedlund, 2017;Woods, 2008).…”

Section: More Actors Less Leverage: the Changing Reality Of Develomentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Donors in transition and the future of development cooperation: What do the data from Brazil, India, China, and South Africa reveal?

Gulrajani

Faure

2019

Public Admin & Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How are Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors evolving their financial flows and aid modalities in response to the growing influence and economic power of Southern BRICS? After presenting the shifting landscape of international development cooperation, we explore five hypotheses about the changing nature of DAC aid allocation patterns and modalities in BRICS countries. In our conclusion, we reflect on the evolution of DAC engagement in Brazil, China, India, and South Africa (BASIC countries) and what it might mean for all official donors. Our assessment is that the changing geopolitical environment for development cooperation is once again privileging economic diplomacy concerns within DAC donors, propelling specific kinds of decisions about the choice of instruments, sectors, and modalities in BASIC countries. It would appear that the administrative practice of foreign aid is increasingly derived from changes within the institutional environment for international development.

show abstract

Section: The Wider Significance Of Donor Transitions In Basic Countsupporting

confidence: 51%

Section: More Actors Less Leverage: the Changing Reality Of Develomentioning

confidence: 99%

Donors in transition and the future of development cooperation: What do the data from Brazil, India, China, and South Africa reveal?

Gulrajani

Faure

2019

Public Admin & Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Second, we shed some light on the hopes and fears associated with emerging donors (Asmus et al, 2017;Fuchs and Vadlamannati, 2013). In particular, China's increased global engagement, like the Belt and Road initiative and the intense China-Africa Cooperation, is one of the crucial geopolitical changes in the last two decades.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

China and the World Bank—How contrasting development approaches affect the stability of African states

Gehring

Kaplan

Wong

2022

Journal of Development Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Supporting this view, Fuchs and Vadlamannati (2013) find that political interests dominate India's aid practices, a non-traditional donor, significantly more than DAC donors. Providing an overview of the literature, Asmus et al (2020) summarize differences between non-DAC aid from Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS) and traditional donors. Collectively, the main differences are that BRICS aid is generally based on non-interference and mutual benefits, remains small in comparison to traditional aid from OECD countries, and tends to provide greater relative support for exports but less grant support compared to traditional donors.…”

Section: Best Aid Practices In the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Grading foreign aid agencies: Best practices across traditional and emerging donors

Palagashvili

Williamson

2021

Review Development Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the rapid growth of non-Development Assistance Committee (DAC) emerging donors, these non-traditional donors are historically left out of the discussion on aid effectiveness. In this paper, we provide the first full evaluation of aid agency best practices across multiple agency categories.We rank and compare DAC donors, emerging non-DAC donors, and multilateral and UN agencies in the following five best practice categories: transparency, overhead costs, aid specialization, selective allocation, and effective delivery channels. Contrary to public impressions that emerging donors engage in worse practices, we find that non-DAC agencies rank similarly to DAC donors: Both groups are equally poor performers. Emerging donors engage in less aid fragmentation across countries and use fewer ineffective delivery channels. Traditional DAC donors, however, provide more transparent reporting. Overall, we find that multilateral agencies and UN donors outperform both DAC and non-DAC bilateral agencies. Collectively, our results suggest that most aid donors do not meet their own standards for best practices, and this finding is not unique to emerging donors. We highlight how our results reflect the broader political economy of aid allocation. | 655PALAGASHVILI And WILLIAMSOn | INTRODUCTIONForeign aid is one of the most researched and debated development topics. An important finding that emerged from this literature is that aid to developing countries has failed to achieve its expected results. 1 Consequently, the last decade has seen a growth in attempts to monitor foreign aid agencies to improve aid best practices and increase the effectiveness of aid. In general, aid best practices focus on the quality of delivery and effective allocation. The primary impetus for change and commitment to best aid practices reached a critical mass with the Paris Declaration in 2005, followed up by the Accra Agenda for Action in 2008 and the Busan Agreement in 2011. At each meeting, donors reaffirmed a pledge to the principles of "best aid practices," with a particular focus on achieving transparent and less fragmented aid delivery.Donor agencies pledged to adhere to better practices of aid-giving, and there exists a variety of methods to evaluate whether donors are engaging in these best practices. These donor evaluations typically include "traditional" donors, such as Development Assistance Committee (DAC), multilateral agencies, and UN agencies. In this paper, we create a new donor category for non-DAC donors, or emerging donors, and provide the first full evaluation and ranking of non-DAC, DAC, multilateral, and UN agencies.Non-DAC donors, such as China, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Turkey, operate outside the guidance of the DAC of OECD members and thus are not required to report aid allocations. This means that their aid practices have been difficult to assess due to insufficient data availability, and they tend to be left out of the discussion on aid effectiveness. 2 However, non-DAC aid is rapidly growing and transforming t...

show abstract

BRICS and Foreign Aid

Cited by 15 publications

References 84 publications

Donors in transition and the future of development cooperation: What do the data from Brazil, India, China, and South Africa reveal?

Donors in transition and the future of development cooperation: What do the data from Brazil, India, China, and South Africa reveal?

China and the World Bank—How contrasting development approaches affect the stability of African states

Grading foreign aid agencies: Best practices across traditional and emerging donors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About