Which Devil in Development? A Randomized Study of Citizen Actions Supporting Foreign Aid in Uganda

H. Milner, D. Nielson, Michael G. Findley
{"title":"Which Devil in Development? A Randomized Study of Citizen Actions Supporting Foreign Aid in Uganda","authors":"H. Milner, D. Nielson, Michael G. Findley","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2134409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Debate over the effectiveness of foreign aid has raged on despite a paucity of information about recipients’ actual views of development assistance, especially as citizens compare aid to domestic government programs. We argue that citizens may see foreign aid as an escape from clientelism because aid is less politicized than government programs, citizens trust donors more, and they support aid conditionality. They may also favor multilateral donors over bilateral donors for similar reasons. We test the argument with a randomized experiment on a subject pool of roughly 3,600 Ugandan citizens – to our knowledge the first nationally representative, large-n study of aid recipients. We randomly assigned the project funders – multilateral banks, bilateral donors, and a control implying the domestic government – for actual co-financed “pipeline” projects and invited citizens to sign a petition and send a text message in support. We find that citizens are significantly more willing to sign a petition or send a text message in favor of foreign aid projects compared to government programs. A companion survey to the experiment reveals evidence that citizens perceive aid as less prone to politicization. Some evidence suggests that Ugandans also see multilateral donors as superior to bilaterals. The findings suggest that recipients view foreign aid as relatively effective compared to domestic government programs.","PeriodicalId":236062,"journal":{"name":"Political Institutions: International Institutions eJournal","volume":"104 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Institutions: International Institutions eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2134409","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

Debate over the effectiveness of foreign aid has raged on despite a paucity of information about recipients’ actual views of development assistance, especially as citizens compare aid to domestic government programs. We argue that citizens may see foreign aid as an escape from clientelism because aid is less politicized than government programs, citizens trust donors more, and they support aid conditionality. They may also favor multilateral donors over bilateral donors for similar reasons. We test the argument with a randomized experiment on a subject pool of roughly 3,600 Ugandan citizens – to our knowledge the first nationally representative, large-n study of aid recipients. We randomly assigned the project funders – multilateral banks, bilateral donors, and a control implying the domestic government – for actual co-financed “pipeline” projects and invited citizens to sign a petition and send a text message in support. We find that citizens are significantly more willing to sign a petition or send a text message in favor of foreign aid projects compared to government programs. A companion survey to the experiment reveals evidence that citizens perceive aid as less prone to politicization. Some evidence suggests that Ugandans also see multilateral donors as superior to bilaterals. The findings suggest that recipients view foreign aid as relatively effective compared to domestic government programs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
哪个是发展中的魔鬼?乌干达支持外援的公民行动的随机研究
尽管缺乏有关受援国对发展援助的实际看法的信息,特别是在公民将援助与国内政府项目进行比较的情况下,关于外援有效性的争论仍在激烈进行。我们认为,公民可能将外国援助视为摆脱裙带关系的一种方式,因为援助比政府项目政治化程度低,公民更信任捐助者,并且他们支持援助的条件限制。出于类似的原因,他们也可能倾向于多边捐助者而不是双边捐助者。我们对大约3600名乌干达公民进行了随机实验,以检验这一论点——据我们所知,这是第一次对受援者进行具有全国代表性的大规模研究。我们随机分配了项目的资助者——多边银行、双边捐助者和暗含国内政府的控制组——用于实际联合资助的“管道”项目,并邀请公民签署请愿书并发送短信表示支持。我们发现,与政府项目相比,公民更愿意签署请愿书或发短信支持外国援助项目。该实验的一项配套调查显示,有证据表明,公民认为援助不太容易政治化。一些证据表明,乌干达人也认为多边捐助者优于双边捐助者。研究结果表明,与国内政府项目相比,受援国认为外国援助相对有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
What Shall We Do with the Bad Dictator? Enhanced Cooperation in Governance Is Europe Growing Together or Growing Apart? Strategic Investments with Competition Under Uncertainty in the ASEAN/AEC: A Game-Theoretic Real Options Analysis Зарубежный Опыт Реализации Региональной Политики На Примере Испании (Foreign Experience of Regional Policy on the Example of Spain)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1