IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/devpol/v44y2026i3ne70069.html

The benefits of US foreign aid in rural US communities: The case of northwestern North Carolina

Author

Listed:
  • Jesse Lutabingwa
  • Renee Scherlen

Abstract

Motivation This study analyses the underexplored domestic benefits of US foreign aid by evaluating the long‐term impacts of two strategic international exchange programmes—the Fulbright Teaching Excellence and Achievement (TEA) Program and the Mandela Washington Fellowship for Young African Leaders—that were implemented over a decade through Appalachian State University in rural northwestern North Carolina. Purpose Most evaluations of US foreign aid focus on external critiques that ignore the positive impacts that programmes can have domestically in the United States. Addressing these literature gaps is crucial in enhancing the efficacy and public understanding of US foreign aid. Approach and Methods The research uses retrospective impact evaluation and mixed methods content analysis. The evaluation fundamentally emphasized causal inference. Although the original programmes focused primarily on international participants, this study used existing data to concurrently explore the broader impacts of these programmes on local communities of the northwestern North Carolina region. Findings The findings identify significant contributions across three domains: educational, cultural, and social. Key findings show that the programmes fostered global awareness, offered professional development opportunities to US participants, and promoted mutual understanding. Policy Implications Ultimately, this research demonstrates the reciprocal value and strategic potential of foreign aid as a domestic development tool in underserved US regions, thereby challenging the prevailing critiques that prioritize foreign over domestic needs. Policy‐makers should, therefore, consider these substantial, multifaceted domestic returns when evaluating the strategic value of international exchange programmes within the US foreign aid portfolio.

Suggested Citation

  • Jesse Lutabingwa & Renee Scherlen, 2026. "The benefits of US foreign aid in rural US communities: The case of northwestern North Carolina," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 44(3), May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:devpol:v:44:y:2026:i:3:n:e70069
    DOI: 10.1111/dpr.70069
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.70069
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/dpr.70069?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Macdonald, David, 2025. "Trust in government and American public opinion toward foreign aid," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 245-263, April.
    2. Helen Milner & Dustin Tingley, 2013. "The choice for multilateralism: Foreign aid and American foreign policy," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 313-341, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bernhard Reinsberg & Martin C. Steinwand, 2025. "Lead or Follow? Participation Decisions in Collective Development Initiatives," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 811-825, July.
    2. Reinsberg,Bernhard Wilfried & Michaelowa,Katharina & Knack,Stephen, 2015. "Which donors, which funds ? the choice of multilateral funds by bilateral donors at the World Bank," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7441, The World Bank.
    3. Emmanuelle Auriol & Josepa Miquel-Florensa, 2019. "Taxing fragmented aid to improve aid efficiency," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 453-477, September.
    4. Terrence L. Chapman & Huimin Li, 2023. "Can IOs influence attitudes about regulating “Big Tech”?," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 725-751, October.
    5. Juan David Gómez-Quintero & Pilar Gargallo Valero & Jesús Miguel Álvarez, 2019. "Who Supports International Development Cooperation in Times of Crisis? Public Opinion in Rural Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-17, April.
    6. Prather, Lauren, 2024. "Ideology at the Water’s Edge: Explaining Variation in Public Support for Foreign Aid," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    7. Axel Dreher & Jenny Simon & Justin Valasek, 2021. "Optimal decision rules in multilateral aid funds," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 689-719, July.
    8. Dreher, Axel & Simon, Jenny & Valasek, Justin, 2018. "The Political Economy of Multilateral Aid Funds," CEPR Discussion Papers 13297, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    9. Chi Him Lee & Brian Tse & Nathaniel Lai & William Goggins & Larry Baum & E Anthony S Nelson, 2018. "Hong Kong’s role in global health: Public opinion of official development assistance," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Hak‐Seon Lee, 2019. "Inequality and U.S. Public Opinion on Foreign Aid," World Affairs, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 182(3), pages 273-295, September.
    11. Maria Perrotta Berlin & Raj M. Desai & Anders Olofsgård, 2023. "Trading favors? UN Security Council membership and subnational favoritism in aid recipients," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 237-258, April.
    12. Kim, Sung Eun & Park, Jong Hee & Rhee, Inbok & Yang, Joonseok, 2025. "What do aid recipients want? Public attitudes toward foreign aid in developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    13. Rudolph, Alexandra, 2017. "The concept of SDG-sensitive development cooperation: implications for OECD-DAC members," IDOS Discussion Papers 1/2017, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    14. Bernhard REINSBERG, 2017. "The use of multi-bi aid by France in comparison with other donor countries," Working Paper 3c664604-b408-4a2c-bf46-5, Agence française de développement.
    15. Lauren L. Ferry & Emilie M. Hafner-Burton & Christina J. Schneider, 2020. "Catch me if you care: International development organizations and national corruption," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 767-792, October.
    16. Léa Marchal & Claire Naiditch & Betül Simsek, 2025. "Aid as a Migration Policy Tool," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 25015, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    17. Gorm Rye Olsen, 2022. "Twenty-First Century Military Multilateralism: “Messy” and With Unintended Consequences," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(2), pages 15-24.
    18. Michaelowa, Axel & Michaelowa, Katharina, 2011. "Coding Error or Statistical Embellishment? The Political Economy of Reporting Climate Aid," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 2010-2020.
    19. Bau, Nicolas & Dietrich, Simone, 2025. "What geopolitical returns does ODA bring?," Kiel Working Papers 2305, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    20. de Sépibus, Joëlle, 2014. "The Green Climate Fund: how attractive is it to donor countries?," Papers 747, World Trade Institute.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:devpol:v:44:y:2026:i:3:n:e70069. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/odioruk.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.