Working Papers

This paper explores the scope for Innovative Development Finance (IDF) to compensate for declining Official Development Assistance (ODA) and/or to enhance the efficiency of ODA. It shows that IDF has not helped much to increase the volume of aid. With regard to efficiency, the role of IDF-related mechanisms remains controversial. In view of the above, it may be more productive to focus on other resources available to Asia. The paper points to two such resources, namely the surpluses accumulated in the form of reserves, Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWFs), etc. and the migrant remittances. Efficient utilization of these two sources can vastly change the development finance landscape in Asia.…

From around 2000 onward, donors and recipient governments embarked upon a new aid paradigm. The most important elements include increased selectivity in the aid allocation, more ownership of recipient countries based on nationally elaborated PRSPs, and more donor alignment and harmonization via program-based approaches such as budget support. The paper assesses the theoretical merits of this new paradigm, identifying some contradictions and limitations, and then examines its implementation over the past decade and its results. The empirical results largely confirm the earlier identified weaknesses and limitations. The paper concludes with some suggestions for improving aid practices.

This paper recalls the history of proposed “innovative” mechanisms by which governments could strengthen financial cooperation for development. Such proposals sought more predictable and assured financial flows to facilitate recipient country programming, while also substantially adding to the volume of highly concessional international support for development. International discussions of these proposals mostly began in the 1960s and in many cases continue today, although implementation thus far has been modest. These discussions are contrasted with generally more recent proposals that proponents call “innovative” but that do not share the characteristics of the more radical thinking…