Development Effectiveness and the Politics of Commitment

Hughes, Caroline; Hutchison, Jane

doi:10.1080/01436597.2012.627229

Cited by 26 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been suggested that taking political economy seriously involves donors taking sides in political struggles and forging tactical alliances with opportunists in the hope of achieving short-term goals (Hughes and Hutchison, 2012). Whereas donors often look for the official 'ownership' of their programs by the states or the ministries involved, any support from existing elites is likely to be opportunistic.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While opponents to reforms are framed as pursuing regressive self-interest instead of progress and the public interest, the idea that capitalist development itself affects the interests of certain classes over others in society, and that attempts to redistribute power may produce powerful structural resistance, is not taken seriously. Indeed, the existence of structurally disadvantaged groups who are subordinate to elite actors À either state, non-state, or community elites À is precluded (Hughes and Hutchison 2012). With the dynamics of these risk management strategies currently in place among most international financial intermediaries and aid donor organizations, it is evident that the global and local economic incentives toward deforestation assumes greater importance À particularly, for countries like Burma that are only just emerging more fully into the world economy.…”

Section: Risk Managementmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Moreover, in translating the program's title into Khmer, the government changed the title to the 'Local Good Governance Project', emphasizing not only the lack of demand for good governance at the national level, but also that it may be more useful to guide the local empowerment of new sub-national councils rather than the national elites themselves. As a consequence, official support for the programs of international financial and donor institutions is likely to prove opportunistic, and donors who are unwilling to import an adequate conception of local politics into their analyses are misguided in their desire for local 'ownership' of their programs (Hughes and Hutchison 2012). Projects like the World Bank's DFGG program can easily be turned around by political elites to legitimize themselves, i.e., by showing the masses that the party is concerned with ideas of social accountability (and its anticorruption message) in the current context of decentralization, while leaving it completely divorced from national politics (Rodan and Hughes 2012).…”

Section: Cambodiamentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Norm diffusion and the limits to forestry governance reform in Southeast Asia's new democracies

McCarthy¹

2014

The Pacific Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The return of the World Bank Group (WBG) to Burma after some 25 years' absence, along with other international financial organizations, follows a series of extraordinary political reforms that have taken place in the country since 2010. Burma has made a transition from 50 years of authoritarian rule to what its leaders call 'disciplined democracy'. This paper examines the likely consequences of the Bank's return for the forestry sector in Burma and the potential outcomes in forestry governance given the evolution of its development agenda over the past 25 years. While measures to address deforestation have been applied in Southeast Asia, the success of forestry governance reforms depends to a large extent on their endorsement and adoption by local power structures and political figures, as well as on the nature of the political regime itself. The record on forestry governance in Southeast Asia is particularly poor and international financial organizations continue to neglect the local political economy of deforestation. Comparatively, few studies have attempted to investigate the relationship between types of political regimes and rates of deforestation. The paper examines two other new democracies in Southeast Asia (Indonesia and Cambodia), and the impact that governance reforms have had on their deforestation trends and land use, in order to contextualize the potential impact of the WBG's return to Burma. In Southeast Asia, powerful vested interests continue to outweigh the support inside governments or civil society for the forestry governance norms promoted by international organizations. The cases of Indonesia, Cambodia and Burma illustrate that deep patrimonial interests operate within the region and that local politics cannot be ignored by international organizations designing policy reforms. The WBG should effectively engage wherever possible with the local communities and a broad range of civil society groups before developing further initiatives.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Risk Managementmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Cambodiamentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Norm diffusion and the limits to forestry governance reform in Southeast Asia's new democracies

McCarthy¹

2014

The Pacific Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet, although this might sound uncomplicated, the failure of basing results systems on partner country priorities is likely a result of more seriously misaligned ends and means—fundamentally based on unequal power relationships between donors and partners (Eyben, ; Hughes and Hutchison, ). In fact, the analysis of aid practice conducted in this article still reveals that there is inevitably a gap between the new rhetoric of ownership and the impact on the overall balance of power between donors and recipients.…”

Section: Concluding Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aid Effectiveness and the Paris Declaration: A Mismatch Between Ownership and Results‐based Management?

Sjöstedt

2013

Public Admin & Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Although recent years have witnessed substantial changes in the global aid architecture, less effort has been devoted to investigating the process of implementing those changes. By using the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) as an illustrative and critical case, this article shows how a donor development priority—gender—travels from Stockholm and headquarters to a Paris Declaration‐infused aid practice in three cases with different aid modalities: Tanzania, Zanzibar, and Cambodia. More specifically, the qualitative empirical investigation conducted here shows that the implementation of the new aid architecture puts severe and competing demands on development practitioners. At the core of this tension is the fact that although all donors are supposed to promote partner country ownership, harmonize their efforts with other donors, and align themselves with partner country priorities, results‐based management simultaneously implies not only a focus on continuously measuring and reporting results but also stricter prioritizations on behalf of donor governments. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

“…The key guiding process has been the Paris Principles on Aid Effectiveness, which emphasises transparency, local participation, and alignment of aid programs with recipient government priorities and recipient government ownership (Booth 2012). After 10 years the results of the Paris Principles are mixed, due mainly to donor countries being reluctant to give up power and control over their foreign aid (Eyben 2010;Booth 2012;Brown et al 2012;Hughes and Hutchison 2012).…”

Section: The Quality Of Aidmentioning

confidence: 99%

NGOs and Political Change: A History of the Australian Council for International Development

Kilby¹

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Development Effectiveness and the Politics of Commitment

Cited by 26 publications

References 5 publications

Norm diffusion and the limits to forestry governance reform in Southeast Asia's new democracies

Norm diffusion and the limits to forestry governance reform in Southeast Asia's new democracies

Aid Effectiveness and the Paris Declaration: A Mismatch Between Ownership and Results‐based Management?

NGOs and Political Change: A History of the Australian Council for International Development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About