Foreign aid transparency amid politicization

IF 1.4 3区 经济学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Heiner Janus, Tim Röthel
{"title":"Foreign aid transparency amid politicization","authors":"Heiner Janus,&nbsp;Tim Röthel","doi":"10.1111/dpr.70038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Motivation</h3>\n \n <p>In recent years, foreign aid donors have tried to become more transparent, often by sharing information digitally. However, the politicization of individual aid projects has resulted in biased reporting, raising doubts about the legitimacy of aid in general. We therefore examine whether increased transparency leads to greater government effectiveness and public trust.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>Government agencies typically assume that greater transparency in public administration improves understanding of bureaucratic actions, thereby fostering trust in the government. In foreign aid, openness is believed to enhance public confidence and improve the effectiveness of governments. However, recent public and political reactions to the disclosure of aid information cast doubt on these optimistic assumptions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Approach and methods</h3>\n \n <p>Using our sender-mediator-receiver model of a “fragile transparency loop,” we analyse how communication breaks down in German foreign aid. First, we focus on Germany as a donor that shares information through a digital transparency portal, examining the sender side. Second, we investigate the mediator side by conducting a qualitative content analysis of German online media articles. Third, we examine the receiver side by disaggregating the German public into several subgroups.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Findings</h3>\n \n <p>Our empirical findings suggest that, while donors assume a virtuous transparency loop, the reality can resemble a fragile transparency loop that is easily disrupted. The government may withhold information; mediators may spread misinformation; and the public may not receive information neutrally. These dynamics explain why, despite increasing transparency, donors may not achieve the intended increases in government effectiveness and public trust.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy implications</h3>\n \n <p>Donors should find a balanced approach to foreign aid transparency that upholds democratic accountability while avoiding information overload. Aid bureaucracies should tailor their disclosure to serve different audiences, including professionals with development expertise and the wider public, who may have preconceptions or be uninformed about foreign aid.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51478,"journal":{"name":"Development Policy Review","volume":"43 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/dpr.70038","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Development Policy Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dpr.70038","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Motivation

In recent years, foreign aid donors have tried to become more transparent, often by sharing information digitally. However, the politicization of individual aid projects has resulted in biased reporting, raising doubts about the legitimacy of aid in general. We therefore examine whether increased transparency leads to greater government effectiveness and public trust.

Purpose

Government agencies typically assume that greater transparency in public administration improves understanding of bureaucratic actions, thereby fostering trust in the government. In foreign aid, openness is believed to enhance public confidence and improve the effectiveness of governments. However, recent public and political reactions to the disclosure of aid information cast doubt on these optimistic assumptions.

Approach and methods

Using our sender-mediator-receiver model of a “fragile transparency loop,” we analyse how communication breaks down in German foreign aid. First, we focus on Germany as a donor that shares information through a digital transparency portal, examining the sender side. Second, we investigate the mediator side by conducting a qualitative content analysis of German online media articles. Third, we examine the receiver side by disaggregating the German public into several subgroups.

Findings

Our empirical findings suggest that, while donors assume a virtuous transparency loop, the reality can resemble a fragile transparency loop that is easily disrupted. The government may withhold information; mediators may spread misinformation; and the public may not receive information neutrally. These dynamics explain why, despite increasing transparency, donors may not achieve the intended increases in government effectiveness and public trust.

Policy implications

Donors should find a balanced approach to foreign aid transparency that upholds democratic accountability while avoiding information overload. Aid bureaucracies should tailor their disclosure to serve different audiences, including professionals with development expertise and the wider public, who may have preconceptions or be uninformed about foreign aid.

Abstract Image

政治化背景下的对外援助透明度
近年来,外国援助国试图变得更加透明,通常是通过数字方式共享信息。然而,个别援助项目的政治化导致了有偏见的报道,引发了对总体援助合法性的质疑。因此,我们研究提高透明度是否会提高政府效率和公众信任。政府机构通常认为,提高公共行政的透明度可以提高对官僚行为的理解,从而促进对政府的信任。在对外援助方面,公开被认为可以增强公众信心,提高政府的效率。然而,最近公众和政界对援助信息披露的反应使人们对这些乐观的假设产生了怀疑。使用我们的“脆弱透明循环”的发送者-调解者-接收者模型,我们分析了德国对外援助中沟通是如何中断的。首先,我们关注德国作为一个通过数字透明门户网站分享信息的捐助国,审查发送方。其次,我们通过对德国网络媒体文章进行定性内容分析来调查中介方。第三,我们通过将德国公众分解为几个子群体来检查接收方。我们的实证研究结果表明,虽然捐助者假设一个良性的透明循环,但现实可能类似于一个脆弱的透明循环,很容易被破坏。政府可以隐瞒信息;调解员可能传播错误信息;公众可能无法中立地接收信息。这些动态解释了为什么尽管透明度不断提高,但捐助者可能无法实现政府效率和公众信任的预期提高。政策影响捐助国应找到一种平衡的对外援助透明度方法,既维护民主问责制,又避免信息过载。援助机构应该调整其信息披露,以服务不同的受众,包括具有发展专业知识的专业人员和更广泛的公众,他们可能对外国援助有先入为主的观念或不了解情况。
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
Development Policy Review
Development Policy Review DEVELOPMENT STUDIES-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
87
期刊介绍: Development Policy Review is the refereed journal that makes the crucial links between research and policy in international development. Edited by staff of the Overseas Development Institute, the London-based think-tank on international development and humanitarian issues, it publishes single articles and theme issues on topics at the forefront of current development policy debate. Coverage includes the latest thinking and research on poverty-reduction strategies, inequality and social exclusion, property rights and sustainable livelihoods, globalisation in trade and finance, and the reform of global governance. Informed, rigorous, multi-disciplinary and up-to-the-minute, DPR is an indispensable tool for development researchers and practitioners alike.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信