2012
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2362349
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fungibility and the Choice of Aid Modalities The Red Herring Revisited

Abstract: The 'right' choice of instruments and modalities to provide aid to developing countries in support of poverty reduction and economic development is arguably the most contested issue in the current international debate on aid effectiveness. A particular controversy exists around the provision of aid in the form of budget support to avoid high transaction costs and other shortcomings of traditional project-based aid. Critics argue that this kind of 'programme aid' involves unacceptably high fiduciary risks due t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
25
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
0
25
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Hines and Thaler 1995). In the fungibility literature, the flypaper effect is also quite often used to describe a situation when recipient's expenditures increase by more than the amount of aid received (Leiderer, 2012;Pettersson, 2007b). See McGillivray and Morrissey (2000) for discussion.…”
Section: Comments On Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hines and Thaler 1995). In the fungibility literature, the flypaper effect is also quite often used to describe a situation when recipient's expenditures increase by more than the amount of aid received (Leiderer, 2012;Pettersson, 2007b). See McGillivray and Morrissey (2000) for discussion.…”
Section: Comments On Methodologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hines and Thaler 1995). In the fungibility literature, the flypaper effect is also quite often used to describe a situation when recipient's expenditures increase by more than the amount of aid received (Leiderer, 2012;Pettersson, 2007b). See McGillivray and Morrissey (2000) for discussion.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Incentives can take monetary and non‐monetary forms (such as rules and regulations). Bjornestad () identified four kinds of fiscal incentives: Fiscal resources, which are fiscal transfers from the central government, for example, additional grants for marginalised regions or prioritised areas. Fiscal responsibility, which is the provision of increased responsibility for revenue collection and delivery of services. Fiscal autonomy, which is the provision of increased power to promote or respond to local needs and preferences for public spending. Fiscal accountability, which builds into the system mechanisms to ensure that decision makers are held to account by their constituents. The last of these four, in the form of outcome‐based incentives and accountability mechanisms, has received most attention from researchers and policymakers in efforts to devise ways to improve local government performance by overcoming fungibility problems, mismatches of priorities between central and local governments, principal/agent problems, and moral hazard problems (see,e.g., Eldridge & Palmer, ; Leiderer, ; Shah, ).…”
Section: The International Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Leiderer () emphasised the importance of principal/agent problems in the relationship between central and local governments. In this case, the central government (the principal) is transferring funds to the local government (its agent) in order for it to deliver certain services.…”
Section: The International Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%