Determinants of Canadian bilateral aid allocations: humanitarian,commercial or political?

Abstract.  In this paper we examine the determinants of the allocation of Canadian bilateral aid over the period 1984–2000. We draw on models of donor behaviour that allow us to incorporate humanitarian, commercial and political considerations – the 'trinity of mixed motives'– that affect Canadian aid. We find that allocations are moderately altruistic. Recipient country human rights and membership in the Commonwealth and La Francophonie also affect aid flows. Most strikingly, our results suggest that Canadian aid flows became less altruistic over this period and commercial motives became increasingly important. JEL Classification: H50, O10     

What Determines Bilateral Aid Allocations? Evidence From Time Series Data

This paper models the allocation of bilateral foreign development aid to developing countries. A simple theoretical framework is developed, in which aid is treated as a private good of a donor country bureaucratic group responsible for bilateral aid allocation. This model is applied to time series data for ten principal recipients of bilateral official development assistance. Features of this application are that it caters for the joint determination of aid allocations and for donor allocation behavior to differ among individual recipient countries. Results indicate that both recipient need and donor interest variables determine the amount of foreign aid to developing countries, and that donor allocation behavior often differs markedly among recipients.     

Good governance and good aid allocation

We model the aid allocation process as a rent-seeking contest between two countries and investigate the effects of differing allocation rules on recipients' behavior in a simple framework. We investigate the aid allocation mechanism design that attempts to increase the governance quality of potential recipient countries: the potential recipients spend costly resources improving governance, while the donor country allocates the fund based on their governance quality. The paper compares two mechanisms: one uses a simple winner-takes-all tournament to award the entire available purse to the country with the best governance; while under the other aid is distributed among countries in proportion to their governance qualities. The paper shows the second mechanism outperforms the first only if competing countries are sufficiently asymmetric. Moreover, the recipient who is most effective in governance – and stands to benefit the most from development assistance – has interests opposite to those of the donor. In addition, the paper shows that if the donor country allocates the fund based on both governance and the levels of poverty, it may result in a poverty trap: the leaders of potential recipient countries deliberately allocate funds away from the poorest so as not to better their position in order to receive more aid.     

Impact of health aid in developing countries: The public vs. the private channels

This paper examines the efficient allocation of international health aid. We built a simple macroeconomic model which considers an endogenous allocation of aid mixed between the public and the private channels. We derive a non-cooperative interaction-game involving the private sector, the donor and the recipient government. We compare the equilibrium of the game to the optimal level of health aid allocation, showing a gap between both. The empirical analysis is based on the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) and World Health Organization (WHO) data sets using dynamic panel data model with fixed effects (system-GMM). Our results show that health aid actually reduces adult mortality in developing countries. Furthermore, we show that the actual allocation of aid-mix between government and private channels is not health efficient and there is room for reallocation.     

Aiding violence or peace? The impact of foreign aid on the risk of civil conflict in sub-Saharan Africa

This paper considers the impact of foreign aid flows on the risk of civil conflict. We improve on earlier studies on this topic by addressing the problem of the endogenous aid allocation using GDP levels of donor countries as instruments. A more structural addition to the literature is that we efficiently control for unobserved country specific effects in typical conflict onset and conflict continuation models by first differencing. The literature often overlooks the dynamic nature of these types of models, thereby forcing unlikely i.i.d. structures on the error terms implicitly.¹ As a consequence, malfunctioning institutions, deep-rooted political grievances, or any other obvious, yet unobserved and time persistent determinants of war are simply assumed away. We find a statistically significant and economically important negative effect of foreign aid flows on the probability of ongoing civil conflicts to continue (the continuation probability), such that increasing aid flows tends to decrease civil conflict duration. We do not find a significant relationship between aid flows and the probability of civil conflicts to start (the onset probability).     

What determines foreign aid? The donors' perspective

This paper examines the factors affecting the support for foreign aid among voters in donor countries. A simple theoretical model, which considers an endogenous determination of official and private aid flows, relates individual income to aid support and also suggests that government efficiency is an important factor in this regard. The empirical analysis of individual attitudes, based on the World Values Surveys, reveals that satisfaction with own government performance and individual relative income are positively related to the willingness to provide foreign aid. Furthermore, using actual donor country data we find that aid is adversely affected by own government inefficiency.     

CONDITIONING AID ON SOCIAL EXPENDITURES

Aid conditionality forces countries to adopt policies that they would not otherwise choose. We examine how government discretion should be so constrained when the donor cannot fully control public expenditures, but instead can influence a less disaggregated indicator of public policy, namely the allocation of public spending between the social sectors (e.g. education, health, etc.) on the one hand and more traditional public goods (e.g. infrastructure) on the other. We first show how budget allocations will be altered when recipient government preferences are known – i.e. we characterize what policies the donor should "buy"– and how a given aid budget should be allocated between different types of countries. When recipient government preferences are not known by the donor, the permitted policies are distorted due to incentive constraints, and the extent to which aid flows are optimally differentiated between different countries is reduced.     

The Politics of Foreign Aid: A Median Voter Perspective

The paper presents a model where the median voter in the donor country determines the support of foreign aid. It is first established that an individual in the donor country is affected by the direct benefits (due to altruism) and costs (due to taxes) of giving aid, and by the indirect benefits or costs of a change in the terms of trade. Then it is shown that the latter effect works through changing both the donor country's average income and its distribution of income. Given the stylized facts of a capital-abundant donor country and relatively capital-poor median voter, it is shown how redistribution-of-income effects soften the impact of terms-of-trade changes on the political support for foreign aid.     

Motivation for bilateral aid allocation: Altruism or trade benefits

This paper argues that OECD countries allocate more aid to recipient nations who import goods in which donor nations have a comparative advantage in production. The estimates indicate that a substantially larger amount of aid is provided to recipients who import capital goods, while imports by other category groups have no significant effects. Given that developed donor nations are major producers and exporters of capital goods, this result at least partially supports their trade benefits motive. Donors also appear to be more concerned about alleviating physical miseries (infant mortality) and rewarding good human rights conditions, but less towards reducing economic hardships (poverty). Moreover, the usual political and strategic considerations of donors continue to be the major determinants of aid allocation even in the Post Cold War era.     

The effects of parent company business on occupational credit union behaviour

The allocation of British bilateral foreign aid among developing countries is simultaneously modelled, focusing on allocations during the period 1980–87. Two aid allocation decisions are analysed using a variant of the Lee-Maddala econometric model. The first decision concerns the determination of developing country eligibility for aid, while the second concerns the amount of aid eligible countries are allocated. Given the implied two-part decision-making process, sample selection techniques are employed. It is hypothesized that British bilateral aid eligibility and amount decisions are based on Bristain's humanitarian, commercial and political interests in developing countries. Results obtained indicate that these decisions are generally consistent with each of these interests, especially those relating to the political importance of Commonwealth members.     

The Allocation of German Aid: Self‐interest and Government Ideology

We investigate the importance of geo‐strategic and commercial motives for the allocation of German aid to 138 countries over the 1973–2010 period. We find that geo‐strategic and commercial motives matter. When we relate them to the political color of the German government in general, and the Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development and the Federal Foreign Office in particular, we find their importance to be at least as strong under the socialist leadership. Socialist leadership decreases the amount of aid commitments, controlled for other factors.     

Donor ideology and types of foreign aid

We examine how donor government ideology influences the composition of foreign aid flows. We use data for 23 OECD countries over the period 1960–2009 and distinguish between multilateral and bilateral aid, grants and loans, recipient characteristics such as income and political institutions, tied and untied aid, and aid by sector. The results show that leftist governments increased the growth of bilateral grant aid, and more specifically grant aid to least developed and lower middle-income countries. Our findings confirm partisan politics hypotheses because grants are closely analogous to domestic social welfare transfer payments, and poverty and inequality are of greatest concern for less developed recipient countries.     

Donor Strategy under the Fungibility of Foreign Aid

We develop a political–economic model of aid fungibility: a part of aid is diverted away from its intended target by lobby groups. The size of this diversion – the degree of aid fungibility – is determined endogenously by the recipient government. The donor can affect the equilibrium degree of fungibility by choosing both the size of aid and the timing of its decision. We derive a condition under which the donor's reaction to fungibility is to reduce the amount of aid. Under this condition, if the donor acts as a follower, both the donor and the target group are better off.     

Veto players and foreign aid provision

This study investigates how the political institutions of developed economies influence their foreign assistance. Specifically, we argue that the number of effective veto players has a negative effect on the volume of aid provision. To provide foreign assistance, the incumbent government in a donor country must have unanimous support from all effective veto players in policy making. Thus, it has more barriers to overcome when the polity is characterized by many and preference-wise heterogeneous veto players. By examining the official development assistance outflows of 27 OECD countries for the period of 1977–2006, we find empirical patterns that corroborate our argument.     

Why conditional aid does not work and what can be done about it?

This paper studies a simple reform that introduces ex post incentives for the donor to reward good policies—contrary to existing practices. Instead of committing aid to each recipient ex ante and making aid conditional on reform, the donor centralizes the disbursement decision by committing aid to a group of countries. The actual amount disbursed to each individual country would depend on its relative performance. This explicit linkage of the allocation and disbursement decisions has two important advantages as compared to present practices. First, it raises the opportunity cost of disbursing aid ex post, thereby giving the donor stronger incentives to reward good policies. Second, competition among recipients allows the donor to make inferences about common shocks, which otherwise conceal the recipient's choice of action. This enables the donor to give aid more efficiently.     

Do Potential Skilled Emigrants Care about Political Stability at Home?

In this paper, we consider the role of political stability in the source country as a potential reason for skilled emigration. We control for all prospective source country characteristics, and yet skilled emigration is seen to be driven by a relatively better situation of political stability in the home country. Our research clearly shows that government stability, socioeconomic conditions, investment profiles, democratic accountability, internal conflict, and ethnic tensions in source nations have significant impacts on the rate of skilled emigration for a sample of developed and developing countries. The results retain robustness even for a subset of only developing nations.     

Aid effectiveness and limited enforceable conditionality

This paper analyzes optimal foreign aid policy in a neoclassical growth framework with a conflict of interest between the donor and the recipient government. Aid conditionality is modeled as a limited enforceable dynamic contract. We define the contract to be self-enforcing if, at any point in time, the conditions imposed on aid funds are supportable by the threat of a permanent aid cutoff from then onward. Quantitative results show that optimal self-enforcing conditional aid strongly stimulates the developing economy and substantially increases welfare. However, aid effectiveness comes at a high cost: to ensure enforceability, less benevolent political regimes receive permanently larger aid funds in return for a less intense conditionality.     

On the provision of official and private foreign aid

The provision of official relative to private foreign aid varies considerably between donor countries. We explain the variations in terms of country size, household composition, income distribution, and the government's ability to commit to aid, and derive inter alia the results: (1) official aid crowds out private aid, (2) total aid and official aid collected from each household are lower in more populous countries, (3) total aid is lower if (i) the distribution of income favors the more altruistic households, and (ii) the government can credibly commit to a certain level of aid. Evidences suggest that the theoretical results can explain stylized facts.     

The politics of special purpose trust funds

Over the last decades, bilateral donors of foreign aid have increased their use of special purpose trust funds to provide earmarked aid to multilateral organizations. This paper investigates the incentives and consequences underlying this recent shift toward country‐ or theme‐specific funding and away from bilateral and multilateral aid. We propose a game‐theoretic model with multiple principals and a multilateral agent to study how the interaction between donor preferences, voter concerns in the donor country, the voting rules at the multilateral organization, and the presence of special purpose trust funds influences aid allocation. We show that multilateral organizations with majority rules are more likely to receive discretion and thus voluntary core contributions than those with unanimity requirements and that the possibility of earmarking multilateral aid decreases donors’ contributions to the multilateral's discretionary core budget and the amount of bilateral aid. In contrast to much of the literature dealing with issues of delegation and bi‐ and multilateral aid, our model suggests non‐monotonic effects of preference heterogeneity on the choice of aid channel for some parameter combinations when contributions to special purpose trust funds are an option.     

Aid, Growth and Democracy

To the extent that aid is justified by the benefits to the recipient, rather than to the donor, it might be reasonably judged on two criteria: growth and poverty-alleviation. We study the first of these criteria. We find that the long-run growth impact of aid is conditional on the degree of political and civil liberties in the recipient country. Aid has a positive impact on growth in countries with an institutionalized check on governmental power; that is, in more democratic countries. The data suggest, however, that if this is not the case, aid will be used to satisfy the government's own non-productive goals. We also find that aid on average is not channeled to more democratic countries, even though there are large cross-country differences between major donors.