The choice among aid donors: The effects of multilateral vs. bilateral aid on recipient behavioral support |
| |
Authors: | Michael G. Findley Helen V. Milner Daniel L. Nielson |
| |
Affiliation: | 1.Department of Government,University of Texas at Austin,Austin,USA;2.Department of Politics,Princeton University,Princeton,USA;3.Department of Political Science,Brigham Young University,Provo,USA |
| |
Abstract: | Scholars studying foreign assistance differ over whether multilateral aid is preferable to bilateral aid for promoting development, but nearly all build their cases primarily on highly aggregated cross-national time-series data. We investigate this topic experimentally from the perspective of those whom the foreign aid directly affects: recipient citizens and elites. We thus report results of a survey experiment with behavioral outcomes on more than 3000 Ugandan citizens and over 300 members of Uganda’s Parliament. In spite of a large literature suggesting differences, the findings generally reveal few substantive differences in citizens’ and elites’ preferences and behavior toward the two types of aid. While no strong pattern of differences emerges, limited evidence suggests that the public evinces greater trust in multilateral institutions, and both masses and elites feel that multilateral aid is more transparent. Overall, these null results inform an ever-expanding literature, which is increasingly articulating distinctions between multilateral and bilateral aid. At least in the minds of the recipients, however, multilateral and bilateral aid may not in fact be all that different. This accords with the literature noting the strong overlap in aid organizations and bemoaning the fact that they do not specialize more. Our results raise the question about why have both multilateral and bilateral aid donors if they in effect do the same thing. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|