IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/devaaa/284-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Crushed Aid: Fragmentation in Sectoral Aid

Author

Listed:
  • Emmanuel Frot

    (Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics)

  • Javier Santiso

    (OECD)

Abstract

This paper measures and compares fragmentation in aid sectors. Past studies focused on aggregate country data but a sector analysis provides a better picture of fragmentation. We start by counting the number of aid projects in the developing world and find that, in 2007, more than 90 000 projects were running simultaneously. Project proliferation is on a steep upward trend and will certainly be reinforced by the emergence of new donors. Developing countries with the largest numbers of aid projects have more than 2 000 in a single year. In parallel to this boom of aid projects, there has been a major shift towards social sectors and, as a consequence, these are the most fragmented. We quantify fragmentation in each aid sector for donors and recipients and identify which exhibit the highest fragmentation. While fragmentation is usually seen as an issue when it is excessive, we also show that some countries suffer from too little fragmentation. An original contribution of this paper is to develop a monopoly index that identifies countries where a donor enjoys monopoly power. Finally, we characterise countries with high fragmentation levels. Countries that are poor, democratic and have a large population get more fragmented aid. However, this is only because poor and democratic countries attract more donors. Once we control for the number of donors in a country-sector, democratic countries do not appear different from non-democratic ones in any sector and poor countries actually have a slightly less fragmented aid allocation. Cet article mesure et compare le niveau de fragmentation de l’aide au développement dans différents secteurs d’allocation. Les précédents travaux consacrés au sujet se limitaient à l’analyse de données agrégées au niveau national. Une décomposition sectorielle permet d’appréhender plus précisément le phénomène de fragmentation. On évalue à plus de 90 000 le nombre de projets financés par l’aide en 2007. Cette prolifération est en constante augmentation, et sera certainement renforcée par l’émergence de nouveaux pays donneurs. Les pays en développement qui sont le siège du plus grand nombre de projets en accueillent plus de 2000 par an. Parallèlement à cette explosion du nombre de projets, l’allocation sectorielle de l’aide a été modifiée, avec de plus en plus de projets dans les secteurs à buts sociaux. En conséquence, ces secteurs sont les plus fragmentés. Nous quantifions cette fragmentation pour les pays donneurs et récipiendaires, et établissons une liste de ceux où elle est la plus élevée. Nous étudions aussi le revers du problème de la fragmentation de l’aide : tandis que celle-ci est généralement considérée comme problématique lorsqu’elle est trop élevée, nous montrons que certains pays souffrent de trop peu de fragmentation. Nous créons un indice afin d’identifier les pays en développement où un donneur bénéficie d’une position de monopole. La dernière partie de l’article s’attache à caractériser les pays qui ont des niveaux de fragmentation élevés. Les pays pauvres, démocratiques et avec une importante population, reçoivent une aide plus fragmentée. Mais ces résultats s’expliquent par le fait que les pays pauvres et démocratiques attirent aussi plus de donneurs. Une fois que nous prenons cet effet en compte, il apparaît que le niveau de démocratie n’influence pas la fragmentation de l’aide, et que l’aide aux pays pauvres est en fait légèrement moins fragmentée.

Suggested Citation

  • Emmanuel Frot & Javier Santiso, 2010. "Crushed Aid: Fragmentation in Sectoral Aid," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 284, OECD Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:devaaa:284-en
    DOI: 10.1787/218465127786
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/218465127786
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/218465127786?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Emmanuel Frot & Javier Santiso, 2011. "Herding in Aid Allocation," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(1), pages 54-74, February.
    2. Caselli, Francesco, 2005. "Accounting for Cross-Country Income Differences," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 9, pages 679-741, Elsevier.
    3. Helmut Reisen & Sokhna Ndoye, 2008. "Prudent versus Imprudent Lending to Africa: From debt relief to emerging lenders," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 268, OECD Publishing.
    4. Daron Acemoglu & Simon Johnson & James A. Robinson, 2001. "The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1369-1401, December.
    5. William Easterly & Tobias Pfutze, 2008. "Where Does the Money Go? Best and Worst Practices in Foreign Aid," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 22(2), pages 29-52, Spring.
    6. Djankov, Simeon & Montalvo, Jose G. & Reynal-Querol, Marta, 2009. "Aid with multiple personalities," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 217-229, June.
    7. Arnab Acharya & Ana Teresa Fuzzo de Lima & Mick Moore, 2006. "Proliferation and fragmentation: Transactions costs and the value of aid," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(1), pages 1-21.
    8. Knack, Stephen & Rahman, Aminur, 2007. "Donor fragmentation and bureaucratic quality in aid recipients," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 176-197, May.
    9. Frot, Emmanuel, 2009. "Early vs. Late in Aid Partnerships and Implications for Tackling Aid Fragmentation," SITE Working Paper Series 1, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics.
    10. Douglass C. North, 1991. "Institutions," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 97-112, Winter.
    11. Easterly, William, 1999. "The ghost of financing gap: testing the growth model used in the international financial institutions," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 423-438, December.
    12. Caselli, Francesco, 2005. "Accounting for cross-country income differences," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3567, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. William Easterly, 2009. "Can the West Save Africa?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 373-447, June.
    14. Emmanuel Frot & Javier Santiso, 2008. "Development Aid and Portfolio Funds: Trends, Volatility and Fragmentation," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 275, OECD Publishing.
    15. Caselli, Francesco, 2005. "Accounting for cross-country income differences," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 5266, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Eduardo Borensztein & Julia Cagé & Daniel Cohen & Cécile Valadier, 2008. "Aid Volatility and Macro Risks in Low-Income Countries," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 273, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Temple, Jonathan R.W., 2010. "Aid and Conditionality," Handbook of Development Economics, in: Dani Rodrik & Mark Rosenzweig (ed.), Handbook of Development Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 4415-4523, Elsevier.
    2. Kilby, Christopher, 2011. "What Determines the Size of Aid Projects?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 1981-1994.
    3. KPOGNON, Koffi & BAH, Mamadou, 2019. "Does institutional quality contribute to increasing labour productivity in sub-Saharan Africa? An empirical analysis," MPRA Paper 98674, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Qian, Nancy & Lagakos, David & Moll, Benjamin & Porzio, Tommaso, 2012. "Experience Matters: Human Capital and Development Accounting," CEPR Discussion Papers 9253, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Liya Palagashvili & Claudia R. Williamson, 2021. "Grading foreign aid agencies: Best practices across traditional and emerging donors," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 654-676, May.
    6. Liang, Yan, 2022. "Impact of financial development on outsourcing and aggregate productivity," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    7. Iliana Olivié & Aitor Pérez, 2016. "Why don’t donor countries coordinate their aid? A case study of European donors in Morocco," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 16(1), pages 52-64, January.
    8. Enrico Spolaore & Romain Wacziarg, 2009. "The Diffusion of Development," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(2), pages 469-529.
    9. Axel Dreher & Pierre-Guillaume Méon & Friedrich Schneider, 2014. "The devil is in the shadow. Do institutions affect income and productivity or only official income and official productivity?," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 121-141, January.
    10. Emmanuel Frot & Javier Santiso, 2011. "Herding in Aid Allocation," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 64(1), pages 54-74, February.
    11. Dalgaard, Carl-Johan & Strulik, Holger, 2013. "The history augmented Solow model," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 134-149.
    12. Islam, Md. Rabiul & Madsen, Jakob B. & Raschky, Paul A., 2015. "Gold and silver mining in the 16th and 17th centuries, land titles and agricultural productivity," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 150-166.
    13. Méon, Pierre-Guillaume & Weill, Laurent, 2010. "Is Corruption an Efficient Grease?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 244-259, March.
    14. Yasar Ersan & Ilhan Can Ozen, 2022. "Once Upon a Time in Anatolia: The Long Run Development Effects of American Missions in Anatolia," ERC Working Papers 2201, ERC - Economic Research Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Jan 2022.
    15. Dominick Bartelme & Yuriy Gorodnichenko, 2015. "Linkages and Economic Development," NBER Working Papers 21251, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Aljarallah, Ruba A., 2021. "An assessment of the economic impact of natural resource rents in kingdom of Saudi Arabia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    17. Rossi,Federico, 2018. "Human Capital and Macro-Economic Development : A Review of the Evidence," Policy Research Working Paper Series 8650, The World Bank.
    18. Rui HAO & Zheng WEI, 2009. "Sources Of Income Differences Across Chinese Provinces During The Reform Period: A Development Accounting Exercise," The Developing Economies, Institute of Developing Economies, vol. 47(1), pages 1-29, March.
    19. Matthias Busse & José L. Groizard, 2008. "Technology Trade in Economic Development," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 569-592, April.
    20. Aisen, Ari & Veiga, Francisco José, 2013. "How does political instability affect economic growth?," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 151-167.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    aid; aide; fragmentation; fragmentation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F35 - International Economics - - International Finance - - - Foreign Aid

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oec:devaaa:284-en. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dcoecfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.