Technological capability,NGOs, and small-scale development projects

Technological capability underpins economic development, but analysis of interviews with workers in international, UK-based NGOs suggests that it is rarely addressed explicitly when considering support for development work. Instead, the core values of these NGOs tend to determine their attitudes towards technology, with the result that their impact on the development of technological capability can be contradictory. This is borne out by analysis of eleven small-scale enterprises in Zimbabwe which receive NGO support. Some do have a high potential to develop technological capabilities, but others appear trapped in a vicious circle of low skills, poor entrepreneurial qualities, and an overwhelmingly hostile economic environment. NGOs need to develop appropriate technological criteria in order to exert a positive impact on the development projects they support.     

On “Group size and the free-rider hypothesis: Another hypothesis.” by Jody W. Lipford: Comment

This paper develops a positive approach to grant design when the central government and a lobby of local governments are the main agents. It develops the hypothesis that the regressivity or progressivity of per capita grants regarding community size is,ceteris paribus, related to the structure of the lobbying activities of local governments and is independent of hypothetical economies or diseconomies of scale in the production of local public goods. An encompassing lobby organisation using a “one mayor one vote” system of representation supports the regressivity of per capita grants while under “proportional” representation the lobby will support a design of per capita grants which is progressive towards community size. An empirical analysis of lump-sum grants in Portugal supports the politico-economic hypothesis and rejects the hypothesis that economies of scale is the main explanatory cause for the observed regressivity of per capita grants.     

Undermining Western democracy promotion in Central Asia: China’s countervailing influences,powers and impact

This article examines whether and to what extent China’s involvement in Central Asian countries undermines the democracy promotion efforts of the European Union and the United States. Findings confirm that China does indeed challenge Western efforts, but in an indirect way. First, Chinese provision of substantial and unconditional financial assistance makes Western politically conditioned aid appear both ungenerous and an infringement of sovereignty. Second, the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation, inclusive of China’s leadership role, creates an institutional means through which the (semi-)authoritarianism of member states is legitimized and challenges Western emphasis on democracy and human rights. Finally, by the power of its own example, China demonstrates that democracy is not a prerequisite for prosperity, the rule of law and social well-being.