Is development aid securitized? Evidence from a cross‐country examination of aid commitments

Melita Lazell and Ivica Petrikova

Development Policy Review, 2020, vol. 38, issue 3, 323-343

Abstract: Motivation How has the securitization of development affected the distribution of bilateral development aid by sector? Over the past two decades, academics and development NGOs have become increasingly concerned about the impact of the securitization of development. This debate has not, however, adequately addressed the impact of securitization on actual aid commitments to key sectors. If aid commitments are influenced by securitization this will have implications for the types of programmes funded by bilateral donors. Purpose This article examines whether and how securitization has affected the distribution of UK, US, Danish and Swedish development aid by sector through investigating how conflict in aid‐recipient states—and the extent to which these states are perceived as a security threat—affect aid commitments to priority sectors; democratization and peace, conflict and security. Approach and Methods A mixed‐methods approach analyses the policy discourse and aid commitments of the four bilateral donors. The former involves a systematic collection and analysis of development policy documents from the four donors over the last two decades. For the latter we use data from the OECD's Creditor Reporting System and the Uppsala University Conflict Data Programme, along with data from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute and the Global Terrorism Database in a cross‐sectional time‐series regression analysis. Findings The new data produced indicate that the securitization of development has had the most significant effect on aid commitments to states not affected by conflict and that the strategic importance of conflict‐affected states and the domestic character of donor governments both influence the strength of aid securitization. Policy Implications Given the concerns regarding aid for security purposes and donors’ policy discourse, bilateral donors should consider the need of current funding for conflict, peace and security programmes in states not affected by conflict and recognize the role of national security interests in decisions about the distribution of aid.

Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12426

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:devpol:v:38:y:2020:i:3:p:323-343

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0950-6764

Access Statistics for this article

Development Policy Review is currently edited by David Booth

More articles in Development Policy Review from Overseas Development Institute Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().