Traditional aid donors share information and work together in the Development Assistance Committee of the OECD, known as the DAC. But what about non-DAC countries? Development Initiatives has a typically useful update on non-usual suspect aid donors like the Arab countries (led by Saudi Arabia) and rising powers like the BRICs, whose growing international clout is bringing in its wake an increased role in the aid business (as of last week, Brazil had given more to the UN appeal on the Horn than Germany and France combined). As its name suggests ‘Non-DAC donors and Humanitarian Aid’ focuses on emergencies, but takes in long-term development aid along the way.
Total aid: “Between 2005 and 2009 foreign assistance from non-DAC donors more than doubled from US$4.6 billion to US$10.4 billion” (see graph – Middle East countries seem to be very volatile aid donors)…… Foreign assistance from the BRICS grew nominally from US$1.5 billion in 2005 to US$3.7 billion in 2009.
Humanitarian Aid: “2010 saw humanitarian aid from non-DAC donors increase by US$67.2 million to US$622.5 million. Saudi Arabia was the largest non-DAC donor, contributing US$255.9 million. Pakistan and Haiti were the largest recipients, receiving US$356.3 million and US$170.5 million respectively.”
Non-DAC donors are moving away from traditional bilateral government funding and supporting the multilateral system instead:
“The top two donor governments contributing to the Haiti emergency response fund were non-DAC donors – Saudi Arabia, with US$50 million, and Brazil, with US$8 million.”
South-South cooperation is on the rise: “In 2011 the Poverty and Hunger Alleviation Fund was established through trilateral agreements between India, Brazil and South Africa (IBSA) and offered alternative financing for Southern partners. On 21 April 2011 China released its ‘White Paper on Foreign Aid’, which makes a clear commitment to South–South cooperation.”
Over time, the non-DAC countries could opt to joint the existing aid structures and adopt the policies and institutions of the traditional aid donors, or they could go their own way, for example blurring the boundaries between aid and investment, or between public and private delivery channels. My money’s on the latter course.
I’d appreciate links to any other good overviews of the nature of non-DAC aid, especially China’s.
Update: oops, this wasn’t supposed to go up til tomorrow – will make tomorrow a blog free day out of consideration to info overload……..