The Experts below are selected from a list of 20181 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jos Van Gennip - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Post-conflict Reconstruction and Development
Development, 2005Co-Authors: Jos Van GennipAbstract:Jos van Gennip argues that finding resources for post-conflict reconstruction and development obviously poses a critical challenge and the international community must play a part. However, rather than the development of the Countries it is too often the strategic interests of large western Donor Countries that ultimately determine the level of aid. Successful security and development has to face these challenges and consequently planned in close consultation with national and regional actors.
Asteris Huliaras - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The perils of outsourcing post-conflict reconstruction: Donor Countries, international NGOs and private military and security companies
Conflict Security & Development, 2015Co-Authors: Nikolaos Tzifakis, Asteris HuliarasAbstract:During the last few years, some Donor Countries (especially the US and the UK) have been increasingly outsourcing services in post-conflict operations to international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) and private military and security companies (PMSCs). These states have also adopted ‘integrated approaches’ to their policy interventions, contributing to the emergence of an ‘aid and security market’. The article uses ideas from both development and defence studies and re-problematises the contracting states' relationship with PMSCs and INGOs. It argues that although INGOs and PMSCs are very different types of non-state actors, there are striking similarities in outsourcing practices. Moreover, it demonstrates that the leading contracting states have poorly managed their contracts with both INGOs and PMSCs, and have not seriously reflected on the unintended consequences of their contracting practices on the recovery of war-affected Countries.
-
Hegemonic Relationships: Donor Countries and NGOs in Western Balkan Post-Conflict Reconstruction
Southeastern Europe, 2013Co-Authors: Nikolaos Tzifakis, Asteris HuliarasAbstract:The impact of Non-Governmental Organizations’ reconstruction activities in Bosnia and Kosovo was largely determined by the nature and content of two dominant relationships. The first is the Donor Countries-International NGO (INGO) relationship. To grasp the importance of this relationship, it suffices to mention that, at the global level, Donors give around five times more funds to INGOs (and more precisely to their own national NGOs) than to Local NGOs (LNGOs). The second is the International NGO-LNGO relationship. With respect to the first relationship, Donor Countries had a clear hegemonic position vis-a-vis INGOs. In turn, INGOs developed a hegemonic position towards LNGOs. These hegemonic relationships undermined the quality and effectiveness of aid disbursed and failed to promote the development of an open and democratic civil society. More interestingly, although most Donors and INGOs got involved in the post-conflict reconstruction of both Countries, very weak learning processes seem to have operated in the region. A comparative examination of the two reconstruction efforts reveals that the manifestation of many inefficiencies and failures was indeed even more acute in Kosovo than in Bosnia.
Sèna Kimm Gnangnon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
De Facto Fiscal Space in Donor-Countries and Their Aid Supply: To What Extent is Trade-related Aid Supply Affected?:
South Asian Journal of Macroeconomics and Public Finance, 2019Co-Authors: Sèna Kimm GnangnonAbstract:This article investigates the impact of fiscal space in Donor-Countries on their official development aid (ODA) supply. It relies on the indicator of ‘De Facto Fiscal Space’ proposed by Aizenman and Jinjarak (The Fiscal Stimulus of 2009–10: Trade Openness, Fiscal Space and Exchange Rate Adjustment, NBER Working Paper 17427, 2011) and on a panel of 22 Donor-Countries over the period 1964–2015. The analysis considers four measures of ODA, including the total net aid transfers (NAT), ODA allocated to all sectors in the recipient-Countries (ODAALLSECT), ODA allocated to the trade sector and ODA provided for the non-trade sector. The empirical results show that greater fiscal space in Donor-Countries influences positively Donors’ NAT, their ODA allocated to all sectors as well as their ODA allocated to the non-trade sector in recipient-Countries. At the same time, greater fiscal space in Donor-Countries does not influence ODA relating to the trade sector. Furthermore, the impact of fiscal space on ODA supply t...
-
Effect of Aid for Trade Policy and Regulations on Tariff Policy Volatility: Does Institutional and Governance Quality Matter?
Economies, 2019Co-Authors: Sèna Kimm GnangnonAbstract:This article investigates empirically the effect of aid for trade policies and regulations on the volatility of tariffs in the recipient Countries. The analysis has used an unbalanced panel dataset of 107 Countries over the period from 2002 to 2015. The empirical results, based on the two-step system Generalized Methods of Moments (GMM) approach, show that aid for trade policies and regulations influences negatively and significantly tariff policy volatility in recipient Countries. Additionally, the findings indicate that the better the institutional and governance quality in recipient Countries, the higher is the reducing effect of aid for trade policies and regulations on tariff policy volatility. These results, therefore, suggest that a scale up of aid for trade policies and regulations to, inter alia, build the capacity of policymakers in recipient Countries to contribute to reducing tariffs volatility in these Countries, which would, in turn, likely benefit Donor Countries. Furthermore, improving domestic institutions and governance in recipient Countries would further enhance the reducing impact of this aid on tariff volatility, which, once again, benefits both the recipient Countries and Donor Countries.
-
Impact of development aid on remittances sent from Donor-Countries
Remittances Review, 2018Co-Authors: Sèna Kimm GnangnonAbstract:This article examines the impact of the aggregate development aid supplied by Donors at the aggregate level of remittances sent from Donor-Countries. The empirical analysis focuses on 22 Donor-Countries over the period 2000-2015. It uses instrumental variables approaches and provide evidence that Donors' overall aid supply could be substitute or complementary with remittances paid flows, depending on the level of remittances sent from Donor-Countries, as well as on the share of migrants' stock on the total population of the host-country.
-
Donors’ Trade and Their Supply of Development Aid Related to the Trade Sector: Does Donors’ Output Gap Matter?
Journal of International Commerce Economics and Policy, 2018Co-Authors: Sèna Kimm GnangnonAbstract:This paper complements the literature on the impact of Donor-Countries’ trade on their supply of Official Development Aid relating to the trade sector (ODATRADE). It investigates whether the impact of Donor-Countries’ trade balance (including overall trade balance in goods and services, trade balance in goods vis-a-vis developing and developed Countries, and trade balance in services) on ODATRADE depends on the level of Donor-Countries’ output gap. Relying on a sample of 22 Donor-Countries over the period 1967–2015, the empirical analysis shows that Donors’ output gap does matter for the impact of trade balance variables on ODATRADE.
-
Market Access of OECD Donor Countries and Their Supply of Aid for Trade
Journal of International Commerce Economics and Policy, 2016Co-Authors: Sèna Kimm GnangnonAbstract:This paper assesses the impact of the tariffs faced by Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Donors’ exports on their supply of Aid for Trade (AfT). The analysis is conducted on the basis of both a Donor/year framework and a bilateral Donor–recipient framework over the period 2002–2009. Results suggest that Donors as a whole could reduce AfT budget supply when they face higher tariffs on their exports. However, low-income and lower-middle-income Countries appear to be protected by Donors from AfT decline, even if they impose higher tariffs on Donors’ exports. Further multilateral tariff liberalization would certainly be conducive to higher AfT.
Aya Kachi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Determinants of Public Support for International Climate Finance in Donor Countries
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2014Co-Authors: Robert Gampfer, Thomas Bernauer, Aya KachiAbstract:The adoption of the Warsaw mechanism on loss and damage has again highlighted the North-South divide in the part of the UNFCCC negotiations dealing with international climate finance. Current estimates put required funding from rich Countries at 50 to 100 billion Euros per year to induce non-Annex I Countries to take on greenhouse gas limitation commitments and to assist highly vulnerable Countries. Results from survey-embedded conjoint experiments can help policy-makers anticipate opportunities and pitfalls in designing large-scale climate funding schemes. We implemented such experiments in the United States and Germany to better understand what institutional design characteristics are likely to garner more public support for climate funding among citizens in key developed Countries. We find that climate funding receives more public support if it flows to efficient governments, funding decisions are made jointly by Donor and recipient Countries, funding is used both for mitigation and adaptation, and other Donor Countries contribute a large share. Contrary to what one might expect, climate change damage levels, income, and emissions in/of potential recipient Countries have no significant effect on public support. These findings suggest that finance mechanisms that focus purely on compensating developing Countries, without contributing to the global public good of mitigation, will find it hard to garner public support.
-
Obtaining public support for North-South climate funding: Evidence from conjoint experiments in Donor Countries
Global Environmental Change, 2014Co-Authors: Robert Gampfer, Thomas Bernauer, Aya KachiAbstract:The adoption of the Warsaw mechanism on loss and damage has again highlighted the North-South divide in those parts of UNFCCC negotiations dealing with international climate finance. Current estimates put required funding from rich Countries at 50–100 billion Euros per year to induce non-Annex I Countries to take on greenhouse gas limitation commitments and to assist highly vulnerable Countries. Results from survey-embedded conjoint experiments can help policy-makers anticipate opportunities and pitfalls in designing large-scale climate funding schemes. We implemented such experiments in the United States and Germany to better understand what institutional design characteristics are likely to garner more public support for climate funding among citizens in key developed Countries. We find that climate funding receives more public support if it flows to efficient governments, funding decisions are made jointly by Donor and recipient Countries, funding is used both for mitigation and adaptation, and other Donor Countries contribute a large share. Contrary to what one might expect, climate change damage levels, income, and emissions in/of potential recipient Countries have no significant effect on public support. These findings suggest that finance mechanisms that focus purely on compensating developing Countries, without contributing to the global public good of mitigation, will find it hard to garner public support.
Nikolaos Tzifakis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The perils of outsourcing post-conflict reconstruction: Donor Countries, international NGOs and private military and security companies
Conflict Security & Development, 2015Co-Authors: Nikolaos Tzifakis, Asteris HuliarasAbstract:During the last few years, some Donor Countries (especially the US and the UK) have been increasingly outsourcing services in post-conflict operations to international non-governmental organisations (INGOs) and private military and security companies (PMSCs). These states have also adopted ‘integrated approaches’ to their policy interventions, contributing to the emergence of an ‘aid and security market’. The article uses ideas from both development and defence studies and re-problematises the contracting states' relationship with PMSCs and INGOs. It argues that although INGOs and PMSCs are very different types of non-state actors, there are striking similarities in outsourcing practices. Moreover, it demonstrates that the leading contracting states have poorly managed their contracts with both INGOs and PMSCs, and have not seriously reflected on the unintended consequences of their contracting practices on the recovery of war-affected Countries.
-
Hegemonic Relationships: Donor Countries and NGOs in Western Balkan Post-Conflict Reconstruction
Southeastern Europe, 2013Co-Authors: Nikolaos Tzifakis, Asteris HuliarasAbstract:The impact of Non-Governmental Organizations’ reconstruction activities in Bosnia and Kosovo was largely determined by the nature and content of two dominant relationships. The first is the Donor Countries-International NGO (INGO) relationship. To grasp the importance of this relationship, it suffices to mention that, at the global level, Donors give around five times more funds to INGOs (and more precisely to their own national NGOs) than to Local NGOs (LNGOs). The second is the International NGO-LNGO relationship. With respect to the first relationship, Donor Countries had a clear hegemonic position vis-a-vis INGOs. In turn, INGOs developed a hegemonic position towards LNGOs. These hegemonic relationships undermined the quality and effectiveness of aid disbursed and failed to promote the development of an open and democratic civil society. More interestingly, although most Donors and INGOs got involved in the post-conflict reconstruction of both Countries, very weak learning processes seem to have operated in the region. A comparative examination of the two reconstruction efforts reveals that the manifestation of many inefficiencies and failures was indeed even more acute in Kosovo than in Bosnia.