After the Big Push? Fiscal and Institutional Implications of Large Aid Increases

Todd J. Moss, A. Subramanian
{"title":"After the Big Push? Fiscal and Institutional Implications of Large Aid Increases","authors":"Todd J. Moss, A. Subramanian","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.984061","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"From the recent G8 Summit to UN declarations, calls for a Big Push in official development assistance by OECD countries are becoming more frequent and pressing. Although there may be a consensus among the donor community to increase giving, what impact will this new aid have on recipient countries? In this Working Paper, CGD Research Fellow Todd Moss and the IMF's Arvind Subramanian point out that currently, twenty-two low-income countries receive aid equivalent to more than 50% of their budgets and eleven receive more than 75%. Given six different Big Push scenarios, Moss and Subramanian forecast that, on average, these numbers will rise to thirty-five and seventeen countries, respectively. Importantly, the authors argue that the potential dangers of increased aid flows will become all the more relevant and pressing as aid intensity ratios increase. These include the effect of aid on institutions and incentives to collect tax. They also raise concerns about whether high levels of aid could actually hurt public accountability and potentially undermine the social contract between citizen and state. Sustainability is a final issue since continued flows are far from guaranteed and rapid increases in aid can create new problems if not sustained over the long run. Moss and Subramanian highlight the important question of aid effectiveness, and urge us to ask: In addition to the possible benefits from increased aid, what might also be the downsides?","PeriodicalId":199069,"journal":{"name":"SEIN Social Impacts of Business eJournal","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"48","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SEIN Social Impacts of Business eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.984061","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 48

Abstract

From the recent G8 Summit to UN declarations, calls for a Big Push in official development assistance by OECD countries are becoming more frequent and pressing. Although there may be a consensus among the donor community to increase giving, what impact will this new aid have on recipient countries? In this Working Paper, CGD Research Fellow Todd Moss and the IMF's Arvind Subramanian point out that currently, twenty-two low-income countries receive aid equivalent to more than 50% of their budgets and eleven receive more than 75%. Given six different Big Push scenarios, Moss and Subramanian forecast that, on average, these numbers will rise to thirty-five and seventeen countries, respectively. Importantly, the authors argue that the potential dangers of increased aid flows will become all the more relevant and pressing as aid intensity ratios increase. These include the effect of aid on institutions and incentives to collect tax. They also raise concerns about whether high levels of aid could actually hurt public accountability and potentially undermine the social contract between citizen and state. Sustainability is a final issue since continued flows are far from guaranteed and rapid increases in aid can create new problems if not sustained over the long run. Moss and Subramanian highlight the important question of aid effectiveness, and urge us to ask: In addition to the possible benefits from increased aid, what might also be the downsides?
在大推动之后?大量援助增加对财政和制度的影响
从最近的八国峰会到联合国宣言,经合组织国家大力推动官方发展援助的呼吁变得越来越频繁和紧迫。虽然捐助界可能会达成增加捐赠的共识,但这种新的援助将对受援国产生什么影响?CGD研究员Todd Moss和国际货币基金组织的Arvind Subramanian在这份工作报告中指出,目前,22个低收入国家获得的援助相当于其预算的50%以上,11个国家获得的援助超过其预算的75%。莫斯和萨勃拉曼尼亚预测,考虑到六种不同的“大推动”情景,这些国家的平均数量将分别上升到35个和17个。重要的是,作者认为,随着援助强度比率的增加,增加援助流动的潜在危险将变得更加相关和紧迫。这些因素包括援助对机构的影响和税收激励。它们还引发了人们的担忧,即高水平的援助是否真的会损害公共责任,并可能破坏公民与国家之间的社会契约。可持续性是最后一个问题,因为持续的资金流动远不能得到保证,援助的迅速增加如果不能长期持续下去,就会产生新的问题。莫斯和萨勃拉曼尼亚强调了援助有效性的重要问题,并敦促我们问:除了增加援助可能带来的好处之外,还有什么坏处?
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