Aid‐supported governance reforms in Solomon Islands: Piecemeal progress or persistent stalemate?

Selver B. Sahin and Evgeniia Shahin

Development Policy Review, 2020, vol. 38, issue 3, 366-386

Abstract: Motivation Despite seeming donor–recipient consensus on the importance of effective governance, aid‐linked reforms often fall short of the expected outcomes. Solomon Islands provides a highly relevant case to explore the dynamics of institutional reform processes, and understand why, even in a relatively favourable operating environment, structural reforms are difficult to implement. Purpose This article aims to provide empirically grounded analysis of key factors that hinder institutional change in fragile aid‐receiving countries by addressing the reciprocal (rather than unilateral) constraints and trade‐offs faced by both recipients and donors, and examining their implications for the emerging institutional trajectories in host states. Approach and Methods This study is based on the use of a single case study that involves in‐depth review of related academic and policy literature, and media reports through the lens of “mutual dependencies.” Findings Solomon Islands’ recent experience with the regulation of Constituency Development Funds and tertiary scholarships makes it clear that by continuously postponing the implementation of relevant policies, domestic authorities try to avoid the potential costs institutional reforms are likely to create. Similarly, donors concerned about their own strategic interests and power relationships with other actors remain unable to enforce full implementation of such reforms. The process in Solomon Islands further confirms that political trade‐offs facing all actors in different forms have a constraining effect on the achievement of desired policy objectives. Policy Implications Policy reforms require domestic authorities to develop specific mechanisms that have the potential to secure popular support in favour of proposed structural changes. Donors need new and more evidence‐based approaches that may help balance between their strategic concerns and the achievement of institutional outcomes.

Date: 2020
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12425

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:366-386

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 ().