IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/wdevel/v94y2017icp250-267.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Formal and Informal Interests of Donors to Allocate Aid: Spending Patterns of USAID, GIZ, and EU Forest Development Policy in Bangladesh

Author

Listed:
  • Rahman, Md Saifur
  • Giessen, Lukas

Abstract

Whether aid serves the development needs of a recipient country rather than the interests of donors has been a topic of much debate and research in the field of development studies. Donor agencies have interests, as does any political actor, and bureaucratic politics theory states that any bureaucracy has a dual interest, consisting of delivering on its formal mandate as well as informally increasing its power by maximizing budgets, staff, and fields for political responsibility. This study aims to conceptualize the formal and informal interests of bilateral foreign donor bureaucracies in allocating aid, using Bangladesh forest development aid by USAID, GIZ, and the EU as a case study. Quantitative analysis of documents on actual spending in the context of forest development projects and qualitative analysis from detailed interviews with development aid experts are employed. Important informal interests of donor agencies were observed as follows: (1) drawing on consultants as well as products and services from the donor’s country; (2) expanding favorable markets for the donor’s economy; (3) increasing the donor’s geopolitical as well as policy influence in recipient countries; (4) obtaining information that is independent from the recipient government; and (5) shaping good governance as a prerequisite for investment from donor countries. Of the three donor organizations, USAID was found to have allocated extensive aid to two activities—consultancy, and collaboration and networking—that advance USAID’s informal economic and political interests. GIZ allocated major aid to recipient developmental interventions; it also advanced its informal economic and political interests (albeit to a smaller extent). The EU allocated the largest amount of aid to developmental interventions, though its informal economic and political interests were also served, even if only to a limited extent. This study concludes with key points regarding informal interests of donor bureaucracies as well as on future research fields.

Suggested Citation

  • Rahman, Md Saifur & Giessen, Lukas, 2017. "Formal and Informal Interests of Donors to Allocate Aid: Spending Patterns of USAID, GIZ, and EU Forest Development Policy in Bangladesh," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 250-267.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:94:y:2017:i:c:p:250-267
    DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.01.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X17300268
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.01.012?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Salam, Md. Abdus & Noguchi, Toshikuni, 2006. "Evaluating capacity development for participatory forest management in Bangladesh's Sal forests based on `4Rs' stakeholder analysis," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 785-796, November.
    2. Martens,Bertin & Mummert,Uwe & Murrell,Peter & Seabright,Paul, 2008. "The Institutional Economics of Foreign Aid," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521055390, October.
    3. Burns, Sarah L. & Krott, Max & Sayadyan, Hovik & Giessen, Lukas, 2017. "The World Bank Improving Environmental and Natural Resource Policies: Power, Deregulation, and Privatization in (Post-Soviet) Armenia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 215-224.
    4. Jean‐Claude Berthélemy, 2006. "Bilateral Donors’ Interest vs. Recipients’ Development Motives in Aid Allocation: Do All Donors Behave the Same?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(2), pages 179-194, May.
    5. Hill, Peter S., 2002. "The rhetoric of sector-wide approaches for health development," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 54(11), pages 1725-1737, June.
    6. Alesina, Alberto & Dollar, David, 2000. "Who Gives Foreign Aid to Whom and Why?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 33-63, March.
    7. Berthelemy, Jean-Claude & Tichit, Ariane, 2004. "Bilateral donors' aid allocation decisions--a three-dimensional panel analysis," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 253-274.
    8. Schusser, Carsten & Krott, Max & Yufanyi Movuh, Mbolo C. & Logmani, Jacqueline & Devkota, Rosan R. & Maryudi, Ahamad & Salla, Manjola & Bach, Ngo Duy, 2015. "Powerful stakeholders as drivers of community forestry — Results of an international study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 92-101.
    9. Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Krott, Max, 2012. "Identifying policy change — Analytical program analysis: An example of two decades of forest policy in Bangladesh," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 93-99.
    10. Younas, Javed, 2008. "Motivation for bilateral aid allocation: Altruism or trade benefits," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 661-674, September.
    11. Scheba, Andreas & Mustalahti, Irmeli, 2015. "Rethinking ‘expert’ knowledge in community forest management in Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 7-18.
    12. Dudley, Leonard & Montmarquette, Claude, 1976. "A Model of the Supply of Bilateral Foreign Aid," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(1), pages 132-142, March.
    13. Tammy L. Lewis, 2003. "Environmental Aid: Driven by Recipient Need or Donor Interests?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 84(1), pages 144-161, March.
    14. Mahmud, Simeen & Shah, Nirali M. & Becker, Stan, 2012. "Measurement of Women’s Empowerment in Rural Bangladesh," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 610-619.
    15. Brockhaus, Maria & Di Gregorio, Monica & Mardiah, Sofi, 2014. "Governing the design of national REDD+: An analysis of the power of agency," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 23-33.
    16. Giessen, Lukas & Krott, Max & Möllmann, Torsten, 2014. "Increasing representation of states by utilitarian as compared to environmental bureaucracies in international forest and forest–environmental policy negotiations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 97-104.
    17. J. Svensson, 1999. "Aid, Growth and Democracy," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(3), pages 275-297, November.
    18. repec:bla:ecorec:v:67:y:1991:i:197:p:147-52 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Dorosh, Paul A. & Haggblade, Steven, 1997. "Shifting sands: The changing case for monetizing project food aid in Bangladesh," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(12), pages 2093-2104, December.
    20. Shackleton, Charlie M. & Pandey, Ashok K., 2014. "Positioning non-timber forest products on the development agenda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-7.
    21. Maizels, Alfred & Nissanke, Machiko K., 1984. "Motivations for aid to developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 12(9), pages 879-900, September.
    22. Linder, Stephen H. & Peters, B. Guy, 1990. "Policy formulation and the challenge of conscious design," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 303-311, January.
    23. Ruttan, Vernon W, 1989. "Why Foreign Economic Assistance?," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(2), pages 411-424, January.
    24. MARK McGILLIVRAY & EDWARD OCZKOWSKI, 1991. "Modelling the Allocation of Australian Bilaterial Aid: A Two‐Part Sample Selection Approach," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 67(2), pages 147-152, June.
    25. Anke Hoeffler & Verity Outram, 2011. "Need, Merit, or Self‐Interest—What Determines the Allocation of Aid?," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(2), pages 237-250, May.
    26. Carl-Johan Dalgaard & Henrik Hansen & Finn Tarp, 2004. "On The Empirics of Foreign Aid and Growth," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(496), pages 191-216, June.
    27. Gang, Ira N. & Lehman, James A., 1990. "New directions or not: USAID in Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 723-732, May.
    28. Sue Unsworth, 2009. "What's politics got to do with it?: Why donors find it so hard to come to terms with politics, and why this matters," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 883-894.
    29. Rahman, Md Saifur & Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Giessen, Lukas, 2016. "Foreign donors driving policy change in recipient countries: Three decades of development aid towards community-based forest policy in Bangladesh," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 39-53.
    30. Ilyana Kuziemko & Eric Werker, 2006. "How Much Is a Seat on the Security Council Worth? Foreign Aid and Bribery at the United Nations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(5), pages 905-930, October.
    31. Sahide, Muhammad Alif K. & Maryudi, Ahmad & Supratman, Supratman & Giessen, Lukas, 2016. "Is Indonesia utilising its international partners? The driving forces behind Forest Management Units," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 11-20.
    32. Schneider, Friedrich & Frey, Bruno S., 1985. "Economic and political determinants of foreign direct investment," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 161-175, February.
    33. Jan P. Pronk, 2001. "Aid as a Catalyst," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 32(4), pages 611-629, September.
    34. Dowling, J. M. & Hiemenz, Ulrich, 1985. "Biases in the allocation of foreign aid: Some new evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 535-541, April.
    35. Lukas Giessen & Pradip Kumar Sarker & Md Saifur Rahman, 2016. "International and Domestic Sustainable Forest Management Policies: Distributive Effects on Power among State Agencies in Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-28, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Samuel Brazys & Krishna Chaitanya Vadlamannati & Tianyang Song, 2019. "Which Wheel Gets the Grease? Constituent Agency and Sub-national World Bank Aid Allocation," Working Papers 201907, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    2. Fatem, Sepus M. & Awang, San A. & Pudyatmoko, Satyawan & Sahide, Muhammad A.K. & Pratama, Andita A. & Maryudi, Ahmad, 2018. "Camouflaging economic development agendas with forest conservation narratives: A strategy of lower governments for gaining authority in the re-centralising Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 699-710.
    3. Fischer, Richard & Lippe, Melvin & Dolom, Priscilla & Kalaba, Felix Kanungwe & Tamayo, Fabian & Torres, Bolier, 2023. "Effectiveness of policy instrument mixes for forest conservation in the tropics – Stakeholder perceptions from Ecuador, the Philippines and Zambia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    4. Rahman, Md Saifur & Miah, Sohag & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "A new model of development coalition building: USAID achieving legitimate access and dominant information in Bangladesh’s forest policy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 248-261.
    5. Rahman, Md Saifur & Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Policy changes resulting in power changes? Quantitative evidence from 25 years of forest policy development in Bangladesh," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 419-431.
    6. Arts, Bas & Brockhaus, Maria & Giessen, Lukas & McDermott, Constance L., 2024. "The performance of global forest governance: Three contrasting perspectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    7. Zhao, Jiacheng & Liu, Jinlong & Giessen, Lukas, 2023. "How China adopted eco-friendly forest development: Lens of the dual-track mechanism," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    8. Markus Lederer & Chris Höhne, 2021. "Max Weber in the tropics: How global climate politics facilitates the bureaucratization of forestry in Indonesia," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 133-151, January.
    9. Gautier, Lara & Tosun, Jale & De Allegri, Manuela & Ridde, Valéry, 2018. "How do diffusion entrepreneurs spread policies? Insights from performance-based financing in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 160-175.
    10. Ameni Hasnaoui & Max Krott, 2019. "Optimizing State Forest Institutions for Forest People: A Case Study on Social Sustainability from Tunisia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-29, April.
    11. Baldwin, Elizabeth & Carley, Sanya & Nicholson-Crotty, Sean, 2019. "Why do countries emulate each others’ policies? A global study of renewable energy policy diffusion," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 29-45.
    12. Garcia, Rocío M. & Burns, Sarah L., 2022. "Bureaucratic politics in protected areas: The voided power projection efforts of conservation vis-à-vis forest bureaucracies in Patagonia, Argentina," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    13. Dorband, Ira Irina & Jakob, Michael & Steckel, Jan Christoph, 2020. "Unraveling the political economy of coal: Insights from Vietnam," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    14. Khan, Md Faisal Abedin & Uddin, Md Sazib & Giessen, Lukas, 2021. "Microcredit expansion and informal donor interests: Experiences from local NGOs in the Sundarbans Mangrove Forest, Bangladesh," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 21(C).
    15. Luca Corazzini & Christopher Cotton & Enrico Longo & Tommaso Reggiani, 2021. "The Gates Effect in Public Goods Experiments: How Donations Flow to the Recipients Favored by the Wealthy," MUNI ECON Working Papers 2021-13, Masaryk University, revised Aug 2024.
    16. Peterson, Lauri & Skovgaard, Jakob, 2019. "Bureaucratic politics and the allocation of climate finance," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 72-97.
    17. Luca Corazzini & Christopher Cotton & Enrico Longo & Tommaso Reggiani, 2022. "Pro-Rich and Progressive: Policy Selection and Contributions in Threshold Public Goods Experiments," Working Paper 1471, Economics Department, Queen's University.

    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. Rahman, Md Saifur & Miah, Sohag & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "A new model of development coalition building: USAID achieving legitimate access and dominant information in Bangladesh’s forest policy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 248-261.
    2. Kafayat Amusa & Nara Monkam & Nicola Viegi, 2016. "The political and economic dynamics of foreign aid: A case study of United States and Chinese aid to Sub-Sahara Africa," Working Papers 77, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    3. Axel Dreher & Peter Nunnenkamp & Maya Schmaljohann, 2015. "The Allocation of German Aid: Self-interest and Government Ideology," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 160-184, March.
    4. Baydag, Rena Melis & Klingebiel, Stephan & Marschall, Paul, 2018. "Shaping the patterns of aid allocation: a comparative analysis of seven bilateral donors and the European Union," IDOS Discussion Papers 22/2018, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    5. Raschky, Paul A. & Schwindt, Manijeh, 2012. "On the channel and type of aid: The case of international disaster assistance," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 119-131.
    6. Reinsberg, Bernhard, 2015. "Foreign Aid Responses to Political Liberalization," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 46-61.
    7. Sèna Kimm Gnangnon, 2016. "Market Access of OECD Donor Countries and Their Supply of Aid for Trade," Journal of International Commerce, Economics and Policy (JICEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(01), pages 1-38, February.
    8. Breßlein, Martin & Schmaljohann, Maya, 2013. "Surrender your market! Do the G5 countries use World Bank Trade Conditionality to promote Trade?," Working Papers 0550, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    9. Nagae, Akira & Katayama, Hajime & Takase, Koichi, 2022. "Donor aid allocation and accounting standards of recipients," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    10. Kim, Nam Kyu & Kroeger, Alex, 2017. "Rewarding the introduction of multiparty elections," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 164-181.
    11. Olofsgård, Anders & Perrotta, Maria & Frot, Emmanuel, 2012. "Aid Motivation in Early and Mature Partnerships: Is there a difference?," SITE Working Paper Series 17, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics.
    12. Barthel, Fabian & Neumayer, Eric & Nunnenkamp, Peter & Selaya, Pablo, 2014. "Competition for Export Markets and the Allocation of Foreign Aid: The Role of Spatial Dependence among Donor Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 350-365.
    13. Brech, Viktor & Potrafke, Niklas, 2014. "Donor ideology and types of foreign aid," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 61-75.
    14. Lukas Giessen & Pradip Kumar Sarker & Md Saifur Rahman, 2016. "International and Domestic Sustainable Forest Management Policies: Distributive Effects on Power among State Agencies in Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-28, April.
    15. Harrigan, Jane & Wang, Chengang, 2011. "A New Approach to the Allocation of Aid Among Developing Countries: Is the USA Different from the Rest?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(8), pages 1281-1293, August.
    16. Abrams M E Tagem, 2017. "Analysing the determinants of health aid allocation in sub-Saharan Africa," Discussion Papers 2017-09, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    17. Jung, Yunji & Kim, Juno & Kim, Kyunghun, 2024. "Whom is economic aid meant for? The push vs. pull determinant factors of official development assistance," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 89(PA), pages 173-195.
    18. Brun, Jean-François & Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2017. "Does trade openness contribute to driving financing flows for development?," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2017-06, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    19. Fatem, Sepus M. & Awang, San A. & Pudyatmoko, Satyawan & Sahide, Muhammad A.K. & Pratama, Andita A. & Maryudi, Ahmad, 2018. "Camouflaging economic development agendas with forest conservation narratives: A strategy of lower governments for gaining authority in the re-centralising Indonesia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 699-710.
    20. Mark McGillivray, 2005. "What determines African bilateral aid receipts?," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(8), pages 1003-1018.

    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:eee:wdevel:v:94:y:2017:i:c:p:250-267. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/worlddev .

    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.