IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v71y2017i04p633-663_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Who Controls Foreign Aid? Elite versus Public Perceptions of Donor Influence in Aid-Dependent Uganda

Author

Listed:
  • Findley, Michael G.
  • Harris, Adam S.
  • Milner, Helen V.
  • Nielson, Daniel L.

Abstract

Does foreign aid enable or constrain elite capture of public revenues? Reflecting on prominent debates in the foreign aid literature, we examine whether recipient preferences are consistent with a view that foreign donors wield substantial control over the flow of aid dollars, making elite capture more difficult and mass benefits more likely. We compare elite and mass support for foreign aid versus government spending on development projects through a survey experiment with behavioral outcomes. A key innovation is a parallel experiment on members of the Ugandan national parliament and a representative sample of Ugandan citizens. For two actual aid projects, we randomly assigned different funders to the projects. Significant treatment effects reveal that members of parliament support government programs over foreign aid, whereas citizens prefer aid over government. Donor control also implies that citizens should favor foreign aid more and elites less as their perceptions of government clientelism and corruption increase. We explore this and report on other alternative mechanisms. Effects for citizens and elites are most apparent for those perceiving significant government corruption, suggesting that both sets of subjects perceive significant donor control over aid.

Suggested Citation

  • Findley, Michael G. & Harris, Adam S. & Milner, Helen V. & Nielson, Daniel L., 2017. "Who Controls Foreign Aid? Elite versus Public Perceptions of Donor Influence in Aid-Dependent Uganda," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 71(4), pages 633-663, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:71:y:2017:i:04:p:633-663_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818317000273/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Seim, Brigitte & Jablonski, Ryan & Ahlbäck, Johan, 2020. "How information about foreign aid affects public spending decisions: Evidence from a field experiment in Malawi," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    2. Isaksson, Ann-Sofie, 2020. "Chinese Aid and Local Ethnic Identification," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(4), pages 833-852, October.
    3. Brandon Cuesta & Lucy Martin & Helen V. Milner & Daniel L. Nielson, 2021. "Foreign aid, oil revenues, and political accountability: Evidence from six experiments in Ghana and Uganda," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 521-548, July.
    4. Albers, Thilo N.H. & Jerven, Morten & Suesse, Marvin, 2023. "The Fiscal State in Africa: Evidence from a Century of Growth," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 77(1), pages 65-101, January.
    5. Kyosuke Kikuta, 2019. "Postdisaster Reconstruction as a Cause of Intrastate Violence: An Instrumental Variable Analysis with Application to the 2004 Tsunami in Sri Lanka," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 63(3), pages 760-785, March.
    6. Seim, Brigitte & Jablonski, Ryan S. & Ahlback, Johan, 2020. "How information about foreign aid affects public spending decisions: evidence from a field experiment in Malawi," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 105255, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Jin Mun Jeong, 2020. "Economic sanctions and income inequality: impacts of trade restrictions and foreign aid suspension on target countries," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 37(6), pages 674-693, November.

    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:cup:intorg:v:71:y:2017:i:04:p:633-663_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    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.