Transcending the Great Foreign Aid Debate: managerialism, radicalism and the search for aid effectiveness

Nilima Gulrajani

Third World Quarterly, 2011, vol. 32, issue 2, 199-216

Abstract: The great aid debate pits those who are radically opposed to foreign aid against those who champion its managerial reform to achieve greater aid effectiveness. This article offers an analysis of the debate by introducing a heuristic distinction between aid ‘radicals’ and aid ‘reformers’. The radical position is notable as it uncharacteristically unites neoliberals and neo-Marxists against foreign aid, while reformers espouse the tenets of managerialism as an ideological and practical vehicle for aid's improvement. Radicals remain sceptical and suspicious of reformist managerial utopias, while aid reformers see little value in radical nihilism. The paper calls for an end to the great aid debate by moving to a discussion of foreign aid that intertwines both radical and reformist perspectives. The ‘radical reform’ of foreign aid is both desirable and achievable so long as aid is re-theorised as a contested, commonsensical, contingent and civically oriented endeavour.

Date: 2011
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (20)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01436597.2011.560465 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:taf:ctwqxx:v:32:y:2011:i:2:p:199-216

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/ctwq20

DOI: 10.1080/01436597.2011.560465

Access Statistics for this article

Third World Quarterly is currently edited by Shahid Qadir

More articles in Third World Quarterly from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().