IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/een/appswp/201415.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Framework for Understanding Aid Effectiveness Determinants, Strategies and Tradeoff

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Howes

Abstract

Prominent reform agendas for aid abound. How do they relate to each other? This article tries to organise the aid reform literature by proposing a general framework for thinking about the determinants of aid effectiveness and strategies for improving the same. It presents three schools of thought on aid effectiveness: the recipient, donor and transaction costs schools. It argues that none of the reform agendas proposed by these schools dominates. Although actual aid reform agendas will combine elements of all three schools, there are in fact important tradeoffs between the recipient and the donor school reform agendas, and between the transaction costs and the donor school reform agendas. Contrary to the clarion calls of prominent aid reform advocates, aid reform in practice is a messy and difficult business.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Howes, 2014. "A Framework for Understanding Aid Effectiveness Determinants, Strategies and Tradeoff," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies 201415, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    • Handle: RePEc:een:appswp:201415
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/app5.15/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jale Samuwai & Jeremy Maxwell Hills, 2018. "Assessing Climate Finance Readiness in the Asia-Pacific Region," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Stephen Howes, 2017. "Aid and Development: A Brief Introduction," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 93(303), pages 656-657, December.
    3. Jo Hall, 2021. "Assessing the effectiveness of development co‐operation: Method matters," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 39(2), pages 266-282, March.

    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:een:appswp:201415. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sung Lee (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/asanuau.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.