On measuring loan concessionality in Official Development Assistance

Roodman, David

doi:10.1093/oxrep/grv027

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More specifically, in the light of the changing nature of the debate on financing for development, the DAC has made a series of ministerial decisions in 2014, 2016 and 2017 that introduced reforms to the ODA reporting system. These reforms addressed issues such as if and how loans and public-private financing modalities should be counted as ODA, the extent to which in-donor refugee costs should be added to a country's aid figures; or the graduation of certain developing countries from the ODA eligible list (Roodman, 2015). The reforms considered would all affect the EU institutions and member states in different ways, depending on their particular institutional set-up and practices.…”

Section: The Eu and The Oecdmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…would change X represent an advantage for donor Y over Z?) and less on their developmental merits (Roodman, 2015). This approach naturally limits the possibility for coordinated action and affects discussions in the DAC: interviewees noted that different members tended to approach the discussion on the renewal of the DAC's mandate based on how it would serve them, as opposed to how it would serve the DAC.…”

Section: The Eu and The Oecdmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The discussion on the EIB loans put a strain on the relation between the EU and the OECD's Development Cooperation Directorate supporting the DAC's discussions (see Verschaeve & Orbie, 2017). Beyond the DAC, there was increasing controversy around the latter group's use of 'profitable loans', in the sense that interest rates were so low that some donors were issuing loans when (assuming repayment) they would make a profit on their ODA (Roodman, 2015). Furthermore, on several topicsmost notably the issue of concessional loansthe DAC struggled for several years, leading to some observers openly questioning the Committee's ability to deal with the monitoring of aid flows (Verschaeve & Orbie, 2017).…”

Section: The Eu and The Oecdmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

United in diversity? Analysing behaviour expectations of the European Union as a non-state member of the OECD’s development assistance committee

Keijzer

Verschaeve

2018

Contemporary Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Union (EU) frequently accentuates its position as the largest provider of Official Development Assistance (ODA). Together with the EU institutions, EU Member States represent 21 of the 30 members of the OECD's Development Assistance Committee (DAC) that sets out rules and standards for what can be reported as ODA. Following the EU Treaty's requirement for the EU to work together in international organisations, research has detected a tentative yet positive trend to this end in different international organisations (IOs). This article's empirical analysis shows no such trend can be detected in the EU's engagement in the DAC. Explanatory factors include divergent development cooperation approaches inside the EU, discrepancies between the established image of and everyday practice in the DAC, and the EU's full DAC membership. The findings add to the literature on international organisation governance by exploring different behaviour expectations of non-state membership vis-à-vis that of states. KEYWORDSEuropean Union (EU); international organisations; development cooperation; organisation for economic co-operation and development (OECD); development assistance committee (DAC); official development assistance (ODA)

show abstract

Section: The Eu and The Oecdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Eu and The Oecdmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Eu and The Oecdmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

United in diversity? Analysing behaviour expectations of the European Union as a non-state member of the OECD’s development assistance committee

Keijzer

Verschaeve

2018

Contemporary Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Can we define global collective action problems away?

Hagen

2024

J of Intl Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals has rejuvenated an old debate: Can foreign aid be used to finance global public goods (GPGs)? There are those who see aid exclusively as a source of development funding for poor countries. And there are others who are open to answering the question in the affirmative. I put forward five arguments why the latter position is reasonable. Firstly, the formal definition of official development assistance (ODA) cannot be said to exclude its use in financing GPGs as these goods by definition benefit developing countries. Secondly, the amount of ODA provided has never been the gold standard of rich country effort envisaged by some. In particular, the level is boosted by the self‐interests of donors. Thirdly, there is ample precedent for following the benefit principle when it comes to multilateral organisations, which are often seen as GPGs. Fourthly, distinguishing between national public goods and GPGs is not always straightforward as the former are in many cases inputs into the production of the latter, and in such cases, the dividing line between ‘traditional aid’ and ‘funding for GPGs’ is blurred. Finally, it is not obvious in practice that aid as country finance always generates greater welfare gains for developing countries than the provision of GPGs. In sum, being overly normative with respect to what ODA is distracts us from the real problem, namely, that collective action problems result in too little spending on all international public goods, including poverty alleviation in poor countries.

show abstract

On measuring loan concessionality in Official Development Assistance

Cited by 2 publications

References 6 publications

United in diversity? Analysing behaviour expectations of the European Union as a non-state member of the OECD’s development assistance committee

United in diversity? Analysing behaviour expectations of the European Union as a non-state member of the OECD’s development assistance committee

Can we define global collective action problems away?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About