Donor Positioning: Development Assistance from the U.S., Japan, France, Germany, and Britain

James H. Lebovic
{"title":"Donor Positioning: Development Assistance from the U.S., Japan, France, Germany, and Britain","authors":"James H. Lebovic","doi":"10.1177/106591290505800111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this study, I show that traditional models fail to account for a theoretically important, windfall profit that countries receive from their primary donors and that a consequence of neglecting this “bonus effect” is that models understate important (indirect) effects of donor interests on aid. Using a Heckman treatment model, I assess bilateral aid distributed to 101 countries, between 1970 and 1994, by the U.S., Japan, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, the OECD’s five largest bilateral aid donors. These five analyses assume that, for a prospective aid recipient, a donor makes two interrelated decisions: (1) how much aid to give that country and (2) how to position itself relative to other donors (i.e., whether or not to be the primary donor). The findings support realist and neo-liberal arguments about the sources of donor aid policy.","PeriodicalId":394472,"journal":{"name":"Political Research Quarterly (formerly WPQ)","volume":"107 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"23","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Research Quarterly (formerly WPQ)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/106591290505800111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 23

Abstract

In this study, I show that traditional models fail to account for a theoretically important, windfall profit that countries receive from their primary donors and that a consequence of neglecting this “bonus effect” is that models understate important (indirect) effects of donor interests on aid. Using a Heckman treatment model, I assess bilateral aid distributed to 101 countries, between 1970 and 1994, by the U.S., Japan, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, the OECD’s five largest bilateral aid donors. These five analyses assume that, for a prospective aid recipient, a donor makes two interrelated decisions: (1) how much aid to give that country and (2) how to position itself relative to other donors (i.e., whether or not to be the primary donor). The findings support realist and neo-liberal arguments about the sources of donor aid policy.
捐助国定位:美国、日本、法国、德国和英国的发展援助
在这项研究中,我表明传统模型没有考虑到理论上重要的国家从其主要捐助者那里获得的意外利润,并且忽略这种“奖金效应”的后果是模型低估了捐助者利益对援助的重要(间接)影响。使用赫克曼治疗模型,我评估了1970年至1994年间,美国、日本、法国、德国和英国(经合组织的五大双边援助国)向101个国家提供的双边援助。这五个分析假设,对于一个潜在的援助受援国,一个捐助者要做出两个相互关联的决定:(1)给该国多少援助;(2)相对于其他捐助者如何定位自己(即,是否成为主要捐助者)。这些发现支持了现实主义和新自由主义关于捐赠援助政策来源的论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信