From Evaluating Democracy Assistance to Appraising Democracy Promotion

Organisations involved in delivering international democracy assistance are engaging increasingly with questions about how to assess their activities. A double shift in the terms of reference, from the ex post evaluation of assistance projects or programmes to ex ante appraisal of the broader democracy promotion strategies, could make democracy promotion more effective. This does not mean abandoning the former; on the contrary its status would be enhanced. Improving the chain of learning that leads from assistance evaluations to the formulation of promotion strategies could improve decision-making over how and whether to promote democracy abroad. Because strategies for democracy promotion are constitutive of the political relationship with countries, different strategies have different implications for the possibilities of political self-determination. For that reason and because democratisation and hence effective democracy promotion may be beneficial for human development, international peace and national security, strategies that reflect informed appraisal would be an improvement on a defective status quo. The challenges include: more systematic data gathering; innovative ways of comparing the various democracy promotion options; and institutional changes that connect the research findings to the high politics of policy-making.     

Does US aid buy UN general assembly votes? A disaggregated analysis

Using panel data for 143 countries over the period 1973–2002, this paper empirically analyzes the influence of US aid on voting patterns in the UN General Assembly. We use disaggregated aid data to account for the fact that various forms of aid may differ in their ability to induce political support by recipients. We obtain strong evidence that US aid buys voting compliance in the Assembly. More specifically, our results suggest that general budget support and grants are the major aid categories by which recipients have been induced to vote in line with the United States. When replicating the analysis for other G7 donors, no comparable patterns emerge.     

A Systematic Approach to Evaluating the Effects of Collaborative Negotiation Training on Individuals and Groups

Negotiation training evaluation tends to be short-term, aspectual and piecemeal; evaluations often focus on only one or two salient outcomes of training. This essay presents a model for negotiation training evaluation research that offers a broad conceptualization of the hypothesized individual and group-level effects of training in collaborative negotiation. The model assesses change at the individual level in conflict-related cognitions, attitudes, affect and behaviors; and at the group level in conflict outcomes and work climate. The Negotiation Evaluation Survey (NES), a time-delayed, multi-source feedback approach to assessment and development, is presented as a means of addressing some of the conceptual and methodological problems inherent in more common methods of training evaluation. An illustrative assessment of one model of collaborative negotiation training for adults, the Coleman/Raider Model, is presented. The results, implications, and future research challenges are discussed.