How to Take into Account Vulnerability in Aid Allocation Criteria and Lack of Human Capital as Well: Improving the Performance Based Allocation

Guillaumont, Patrick; Jeanneney, Sylviane Guillaumont; Wagner, L

doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.10.045

Cited by 16 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We sought to clearly delineate a normative basis for the allocation of DAH by identifying and defining the basic, underlying country-level concerns that motivate the allocation of aid by donors among partner countries. To this end, we reviewed the literature on health financing, development assistance and distributional justice, and we elicited stakeholders’ views through consultations and interviews ( Llavador and Roemer 2001 ; Bell and Fink 2005 ; Cogneau and Naudet 2007 ; Anderson 2008 ; Guillaumont 2008 ; Ottersen et al 2014 ; Røttingen et al 2014 ). Through our investigations, we characterized motivations into 3 + 1 general concerns: health needs, domestic capacity, expected impact, and the cross-cutting concern (+1) for equity ( Table 1 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

New approaches to ranking countries for the allocation of development assistance for health: choices, indicators and implications

Ottersen

Grépin

Henderson³

et al. 2018

Health Policy and Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The distributions of income and health within and across countries are changing. This challenges the way donors allocate development assistance for health (DAH) and particularly the role of gross national income per capita (GNIpc) in classifying countries to determine whether countries are eligible to receive assistance and how much they receive. Informed by a literature review and stakeholder consultations and interviews, we developed a stepwise approach to the design and assessment of country classification frameworks for the allocation of DAH, with emphasis on critical value choices. We devised 25 frameworks, all which combined GNIpc and at least one other indicator into an index. Indicators were selected and assessed based on relevance, salience, validity, consistency, and availability and timeliness, where relevance concerned the extent to which the indicator represented country’s health needs, domestic capacity, the expected impact of DAH, or equity. We assessed how the use of the different frameworks changed the rankings of low- and middle-income countries relative to a country’s ranking based on GNIpc alone. We found that stakeholders generally considered needs to be the most important concern to be captured by classification frameworks, followed by inequality, expected impact and domestic capacity. We further found that integrating a health-needs indicator with GNIpc makes a significant difference for many countries and country categories—and especially middle-income countries with high burden of unmet health needs—while the choice of specific indicator makes less difference. This together with assessments of relevance, salience, validity, consistency, and availability and timeliness suggest that donors have reasons to include a health-needs indicator in the initial classification of countries. It specifically suggests that life expectancy and disability-adjusted life year rate are indicators worth considering. Indicators related to other concerns may be mainly relevant at different stages of the decision-making process, require better data, or both.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

New approaches to ranking countries for the allocation of development assistance for health: choices, indicators and implications

Ottersen

Grépin

Henderson³

et al. 2018

Health Policy and Planning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, criteria linked to economic structural vulnerability may harbour no conflict between need and effectiveness. This is suggested by the claim that vulnerability so defined increases need, but also represents a situation in which at least some kinds of aid may be particularly effective (Guillaumont, 2008). Where the two are perceived to go together, need is sometimes used as a proxy for effectiveness.…”

Section: Allocation Criteria and Analytical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development assistance for health: what criteria do multi- and bilateral funders use?

Ottersen

Kamath

Moon

et al. 2017

HEPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After years of unprecedented growth in development assistance for health (DAH), the system is challenged on several fronts: by the economic downturn and stagnation of DAH, by the epidemiological transition and increase in non-communicable diseases, and by the economic transition and rise of the middle-income countries. This raises questions about which countries should receive DAH and how much, and, fundamentally, what criteria that promote fair and effective allocation. Yet, no broad comparative assessment exists of the criteria used today. We reviewed the allocation criteria stated by five multilateral and nine bilateral funders of DAH. We found that several funders had only limited information about concrete criteria publicly available. Moreover, many funders not devoted to health lacked specific criteria for DAH or criteria directly related to health, and no funder had criteria directly related to inequality. National income per capita was emphasised by many funders, but the associated eligibility thresholds varied considerably. These findings and the broad overview of criteria can assist funders in critically examining and revising the criteria they use, and inform the wider debate about what the optimal criteria are.

show abstract

“…In addition to longstanding political economy concerns on the role of outside parties in national development and the effectiveness of aid, donor engagement with fragile states almost by definition faces a dilemma: fragile countries have a strong need for external assistance but they are less capable of using it effectively, at least compared to the standards of the monitoring and oversight systems required by many donors. When donors allocate aid on the basis of a country's performance, fragile states are placed at an unfair disadvantage (e.g., Guillaumont, Guillaumont Jeanneney, and Wagner 2010).…”

Section: What Role For External Actors?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Building Resilience in Sub-Saharan Africa's Fragile States

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

How to Take into Account Vulnerability in Aid Allocation Criteria and Lack of Human Capital as Well: Improving the Performance Based Allocation

Cited by 16 publications

References 17 publications

New approaches to ranking countries for the allocation of development assistance for health: choices, indicators and implications

New approaches to ranking countries for the allocation of development assistance for health: choices, indicators and implications

Development assistance for health: what criteria do multi- and bilateral funders use?

Building Resilience in Sub-Saharan Africa's Fragile States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About