Everything, everywhere, all at once? Donor bureaucrats struggle with four dimensions of development effectiveness

IF 5.4 1区 经济学 Q1 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Daniel E. Esser , Heiner Janus
{"title":"Everything, everywhere, all at once? Donor bureaucrats struggle with four dimensions of development effectiveness","authors":"Daniel E. Esser ,&nbsp;Heiner Janus","doi":"10.1016/j.worlddev.2025.107017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Our research asks how 89 randomly selected development bureaucrats in three OECD member states—Germany, Norway and South Korea—pursue the amorphous concept of development effectiveness. Amid declining adherence to global norms and a booming evidence industry, our analysis demonstrates the analytical value of distinguishing scales and modes of development effectiveness. In each of the resulting four dimensions, bureaucrats’ pursuit of development effectiveness is conditioned by two primary considerations: how to satisfy their political principals, and how to sway public opinion. The implications are threefold. First, the four dimensions cannot be integrated into one coherent concept. Second, a scalar shift in political attention towards domestic audiences leads donor bureaucrats to regard global policy processes and macro-level impacts as rhetorical devices rather than as substantive reference points. Third, as a result of this dynamic, the purported embrace of evidence-based policy-making primarily constitutes a risk management approach to safeguard national budget allocations through public legitimation. Overall, our findings therefore caution against optimism about an imminent evidence revolution, as donor bureaucracies have entered yet another era of national interest-driven development politics.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48463,"journal":{"name":"World Development","volume":"191 ","pages":"Article 107017"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Development","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X25001020","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our research asks how 89 randomly selected development bureaucrats in three OECD member states—Germany, Norway and South Korea—pursue the amorphous concept of development effectiveness. Amid declining adherence to global norms and a booming evidence industry, our analysis demonstrates the analytical value of distinguishing scales and modes of development effectiveness. In each of the resulting four dimensions, bureaucrats’ pursuit of development effectiveness is conditioned by two primary considerations: how to satisfy their political principals, and how to sway public opinion. The implications are threefold. First, the four dimensions cannot be integrated into one coherent concept. Second, a scalar shift in political attention towards domestic audiences leads donor bureaucrats to regard global policy processes and macro-level impacts as rhetorical devices rather than as substantive reference points. Third, as a result of this dynamic, the purported embrace of evidence-based policy-making primarily constitutes a risk management approach to safeguard national budget allocations through public legitimation. Overall, our findings therefore caution against optimism about an imminent evidence revolution, as donor bureaucracies have entered yet another era of national interest-driven development politics.
所有的一切,所有的地方,同时发生?捐助国官僚们在发展效率的四个维度上挣扎
我们的研究询问了在三个经合组织成员国——德国、挪威和韩国——随机挑选的89名发展官员是如何追求无定形的发展效率概念的。在遵守全球规范的程度不断下降、证据行业蓬勃发展的背景下,我们的分析表明,区分发展效率的规模和模式具有分析价值。在由此产生的四个维度中,官僚对发展效率的追求都受到两个主要考虑因素的制约:如何满足他们的政治原则,以及如何影响公众舆论。其含义是三重的。首先,这四个维度不能被整合成一个连贯的概念。其次,政治注意力向国内受众的大规模转移,导致捐助国官僚们将全球政策进程和宏观层面的影响视为修辞手段,而不是实质性的参考点。第三,由于这种动态,所谓的基于证据的政策制定主要构成了一种风险管理方法,通过公共合法化来保障国家预算拨款。因此,总的来说,我们的研究结果提醒人们不要对即将到来的证据革命持乐观态度,因为捐赠机构已经进入了另一个国家利益驱动的发展政治时代。
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
World Development
World Development Multiple-
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
5.80%
发文量
320
期刊介绍: World Development is a multi-disciplinary monthly journal of development studies. It seeks to explore ways of improving standards of living, and the human condition generally, by examining potential solutions to problems such as: poverty, unemployment, malnutrition, disease, lack of shelter, environmental degradation, inadequate scientific and technological resources, trade and payments imbalances, international debt, gender and ethnic discrimination, militarism and civil conflict, and lack of popular participation in economic and political life. Contributions offer constructive ideas and analysis, and highlight the lessons to be learned from the experiences of different nations, societies, and economies.
×
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