IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cgd/wpaper/348.html

Is Anyone Listening? Does US Foreign Assistance Target People's Top Priorities?-Working Paper 348

Author

Listed:
  • Ben Leo

Abstract

The United States government has made repeated declarations over the last decade to align its assistance programs behind developing countries’ priorities. By utilizing public attitude surveys for 42 African and Latin American countries, this paper examines how well the US has implemented this guiding principle. Building upon the Quality of Official Development Assistance Assessment (QuODA) approach, I identify what people cite most frequently as the ‘most pressing problems’ facing their nations and then measure the percentage of US assistance commitments that are directed towards addressing them. By focusing on public surveys over time, this analysis attempts to provide a more nuanced and targeted examination of whether US portfolios are addressing what people care the most about. As reference points, I compare US alignment trends with the two regional multilateral development banks (MDBs) – the African Development Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. Overall, this analysis suggests that US assistance may be only modestly aligned with what people in Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America cite as their nation’s most pressing problems. By comparison, the African Development Bank – which is majority-led by regional member nations – performs significantly better than the United States. Like the United States, however, the Inter-American Development Bank demonstrates a low relative level of support for people’s top concerns. The paper concludes with a number of policy questions, which should be considered if the US government plans to concertedly pursue closer alignment with local concerns and priorities. These include whether the US government should (1) require regular citizen surveys to help formulate foreign assistance strategies and programmatic priorities; (2) recalibrate health assistance programs in Sub-Saharan Africa; (3) increase support for the African Development Bank; (4) expand under-utilized private sector-based development tools, such as the Overseas Private Investment Corporation; (5) increase its engagement in select Latin American countries to help combat crime and insecurity; (6) better leverage the Millennium Challenge Corporation, which is the only U.S. development institution with an explicit mandate to support country-based priorities; and (7) expand support for USAID’s under-resourced economic growth programs, such as the Development Credit Authority.

Suggested Citation

  • Ben Leo, 2013. "Is Anyone Listening? Does US Foreign Assistance Target People's Top Priorities?-Working Paper 348," Working Papers 348, Center for Global Development.
    • Handle: RePEc:cgd:wpaper:348
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/anyone-listening-us-foreign-assistance-target-top-needs_final.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sacks, Audrey, 2012. "Can Donors and Nonstate Actors Undermine CitizensÕ Legitimating Beliefs?," World Bank - Economic Premise, The World Bank, issue 95, pages 1-5, November.
    2. Sacks, Audrey, 2012. "Can donors and non-state actors undermine citizens'legitimating beliefs ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6158, The World Bank.
    3. repec:unu:wpaper:wp2012-94 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Alesina, Alberto & Dollar, David, 2000. "Who Gives Foreign Aid to Whom and Why?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 33-63, March.
    5. Wolfgang Mayer & Pascalis Raimondos‐Møller, 2003. "The Politics of Foreign Aid: A Median Voter Perspective," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(2), pages 165-178, May.
    6. Dollar, David & Levin, Victoria, 2004. "Increasing selectivity of foreign aid, 1984-2002," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3299, The World Bank.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Pritchett, Lant, 2022. "National development delivers: And how! And how?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).

    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. Stijn Claessens & Danny Cassimon, 2007. "Empirical evidence on the new international aid architecture," WEF Working Papers 0026, ESRC World Economy and Finance Research Programme, Birkbeck, University of London.
    2. Zhou, Yang-Yang & Grossman, Guy & Ge, Shuning, 2023. "Inclusive refugee-hosting can improve local development and prevent public backlash," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    3. Helen V. Milner & Dustin H. Tingley, 2010. "The Political Economy Of U.S. Foreign Aid: American Legislators And The Domestic Politics Of Aid," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 200-232, July.
    4. Axel Dreher & Peter Nunnenkamp & Rainer Thiele, 2008. "Does US aid buy UN general assembly votes? A disaggregated analysis," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 136(1), pages 139-164, July.
    5. Riccardo Settimo & Claudia Maurini, 2009. "Assessing the allocation of Italian foreign aid," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 43, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    6. Subhayu Bandyopadhyay & Sajal Lahiri & Javed Younas, 2013. "Financing growth: foreign aid vs. foreign loans," Working Papers 2013-031, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    7. Michael Chasukwa & Dan Banik, 2019. "Bypassing Government: Aid Effectiveness and Malawi’s Local Development Fund," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(2), pages 103-116.
    8. Mark McGillivray, 2006. "Aid Allocation and Fragile States," WIDER Working Paper Series DP2006-01, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    9. Younas, Javed, 2008. "Motivation for bilateral aid allocation: Altruism or trade benefits," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 661-674, September.
    10. Audrey Menard, 2012. "Why foreign aid does (not) improve democracy?," Working Papers of BETA 2012-19, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    11. HEPP, Ralf, 2010. "CONSEQUENCES OF DEBT RELIEF INITIATIVES IN THE 1990s," Applied Econometrics and International Development, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 10(1).
    12. repec:wvu:wpaper:06-14 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Canavire-Bacarreza, Gustavo & Nunnenkamp, Peter & Thiele, Rainer & Triveño, Luis, 2005. "Assessing the allocation of aid: Developmental concerns and the self-interest of donors," Kiel Working Papers 1253, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    14. Bandyopadhyay, Subhayu & Lahiri, Sajal & Younas, Javed, 2011. "Should Easier Access to International Credit Replace Foreign Aid?," IZA Discussion Papers 6024, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Austin Strange, 2025. "Influence and support for foreign aid: Evidence from the United States and China," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 443-470, September.
    16. Prichard, Wilson & Jibao, Samuel & Orgeira Pillai, Nicolas, 2025. "Sub-national property tax reform and tax bargaining: Lessons from a quasi-randomized reform program in Sierra Leone," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    17. Alessia Isopi & Fabrizio Mattesini, 2009. "Good Donors or Good Recipients? A Repeated Moral Hazard Model of Aid Allocation," Discussion Papers 09/10, University of Nottingham, CREDIT.
    18. Anke Hoeffler & Scott Gates, 2004. "Global Aid Allocation: Are Nordic Donors Different?," Economics Series Working Papers WPS/2004-34, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    19. Balázs Szent-Iványi, 2007. "State Fragility and International Development Cooperation," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2007-29, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    20. Börner, Kira, 2004. "Political Economy Reasons for Government Inertia: The Role of Interest Groups in the Case of Access to Medicines," Discussion Papers in Economics 313, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    21. Alessia Isopi & Fabrizio Mattesini, 2008. "Aid and Corruption: Do Donors Use Development Assistance to Provide the “Right” Incentives?," CEIS Research Paper 121, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 14 Jul 2008.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • F35 - International Economics - - International Finance - - - Foreign Aid

    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:cgd:wpaper:348. 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: Publications Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cgdevus.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.