IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Development Aid and Portfolio Funds: Trends, Volatility and Fragmentation

Listed author(s):
  • Emmanuel Frot

    (Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics)

  • Javier Santiso


This paper presents stylised facts about development aid and capital flows to developing countries. It compares their volumes and volatilities and finds that foreign aid is not the major source of finance for these countries any more, though not for all regions. The expansion of private flows has usually come at the cost of an increased volatility that adds up to aid volatility, already considered to be an issue. We do not find any negative and significant correlations between aid shocks and capital flow shocks. Investigating complementarity between flows, we show that in a cross section of countries official development aid (ODA) and capital flows are substitutes but not within countries. On the other hand capital flows are complements both across and within countries. We also make use of a private funds database in order to underline the differences between portfolio investors to emerging markets and aid donors. To our knowledge this paper is the first to use such data in comparison with aid flows. We find that private portfolio equity is more volatile than ODA, and that it is neither a substitute nor a complement of ODA, both across and within countries. We argue that these results reinforce the calls for a new stabilising role of ODA. We then study aid donors and private funds portfolios to contribute to the current debate on aid fragmentation by providing trends for the last 50 years. We show that aid donors have constantly been fragmenting their portfolios by giving aid to an increasing number of countries, but also by making asset allocations more equal across countries. Private portfolio equity funds, on the other hand, have done the opposite for ten years and put a heavy weight on few countries in their portfolios. These observations complement the existing results about the progressive nature of aid flows and the regressive nature of private flows. Cet article présente une série de faits stylisés sur l’aide au développement et les flux de capitaux en direction des pays en développement. Leurs quantités et volatilités sont comparées. Il est établi que l’aide au développement n’est plus la plus importante source de financement pour ces pays, bien qu’elle le reste pour certaines régions. Par ailleurs l’expansion des flux de capitaux s’accompagne généralement d’un accroissement de volatilité qui s’ajoute à celle de l’aide, elle-même déjà considérée comme problématique. Les chocs négatifs de flux de capitaux ne s’accompagnent généralement pas de chocs positifs d’aide. Nous étudions la complémentarité de ces deux types de transferts et montrons que les pays qui reçoivent plus de flux de capitaux reçoivent moins d’aide, mais que cette conclusion ne vérifie pas à l’intérieur du pays où les variations d’aide et de capitaux ne sont pas corrélées. Nous utilisons pour compléter ces résultats une base de données des fonds d’investissement privés afin de relever les différences entre les décisions des investisseurs qui détiennent ces portefeuilles et celles des donateurs d’aide. Nous établissons que les flux d’actions sont plus volatiles que l’aide et qu’ils n’en sont ni un substitut ni un complément. Ces résultats renforcent les propositions pour un nouveau rôle stabilisateur de l’aide. Nous étudions ensuite les portefeuilles des donateurs d’aide et des fonds d’investissement pour contribuer au débat actuel sur la fragmentation de l’aide en établissant les tendances pour les 50 dernières années. Nous montrons que les donateurs d’aide ont constamment fragmenté leurs portefeuilles en donnant de l’aide à un nombre sans cesse croissant de pays, mais aussi en égalisant leurs allocations parmi ces pays. Les fonds d’investissement en action ont fait l’opposé au cours des dix dernières années en pondérant fortement quelques pays dans leurs portefeuilles. Ces observations complètent les résultats existants sur la nature progressive des flux d’aide et celle régressive des flux privés.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by OECD Publishing in its series OECD Development Centre Working Papers with number 275.

in new window

Date of creation: 01 Dec 2008
Handle: RePEc:oec:devaaa:275-en
Contact details of provider: Postal:
2 rue Andre Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16

Phone: 33-(0)-1-45 24 82 00
Fax: 33-(0)-1-45 24 85 00
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oec:devaaa:275-en. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ()

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.