Publikation:

Is Chinese aid different?

Lade...
Vorschaubild

Dateien

Hoeffler_2-mbapytnqrwz80.pdf
Hoeffler_2-mbapytnqrwz80.pdfGröße: 658.06 KBDownloads: 219

Datum

2022

Autor:innen

Sterck, Olivier

Herausgeber:innen

Kontakt

ISSN der Zeitschrift

Electronic ISSN

ISBN

Bibliografische Daten

Verlag

Schriftenreihe

Auflagebezeichnung

ArXiv-ID

Internationale Patentnummer

Link zur Lizenz

Angaben zur Forschungsförderung

Projekt

Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Open Access Hybrid
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz

Gesperrt bis

Titel in einer weiteren Sprache

Publikationstyp
Zeitschriftenartikel
Publikationsstatus
Published

Erschienen in

World Development. Elsevier. 2022, 156, 105908. ISSN 0305-750X. eISSN 1873-5991. Available under: doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105908

Zusammenfassung

China’s involvement in African countries has been criticized for being guided by self-interest rather than recipient need or merit. For the period 2000–2012, we compare China’s aid allocation behaviour to that of the five largest donor countries globally: France, Germany, Japan, the UK, and the USA. We use regression analysis and a rigorous variance decomposition method to measure the importance of various factors in predicting aid commitments. We find that donors differ markedly in how they allocate aid. While Germany, Japan, the USA, and the UK assign high importance to recipient need, France’s and China’s allocation models are, for a large part, driven by variables that relate to self-interest: trade in the case of France, and the adherence to the “One-China policy” in the case of China. However, China is not a purely selfish donor. As most Western donors, China commits more aid to poorer countries. Furthermore, we find no evidence that commercial interests, such as trade or access to natural resources, determine Chinese aid allocation. This latter result contrasts with Western donors, which allocate more aid to their trade partners. France and the UK also commit significantly more aid to their former colonies. In conclusion, the claim that China’s aid allocation is different must be qualified.

Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache

Fachgebiet (DDC)
320 Politik

Schlagwörter

ODA, China, Allocation, Commitments

Konferenz

Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined

Forschungsvorhaben

Organisationseinheiten

Zeitschriftenheft

Zugehörige Datensätze in KOPS

Zitieren

ISO 690HOEFFLER, Anke, Olivier STERCK, 2022. Is Chinese aid different?. In: World Development. Elsevier. 2022, 156, 105908. ISSN 0305-750X. eISSN 1873-5991. Available under: doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105908
BibTex
@article{Hoeffler2022-08Chine-57429,
  year={2022},
  doi={10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105908},
  title={Is Chinese aid different?},
  volume={156},
  issn={0305-750X},
  journal={World Development},
  author={Hoeffler, Anke and Sterck, Olivier},
  note={Article Number: 105908}
}
RDF
<rdf:RDF
    xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
    xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
    xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
    xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
    xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > 
  <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/57429">
    <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-05-05T09:01:01Z</dc:date>
    <dc:rights>Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International</dc:rights>
    <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/42"/>
    <dc:contributor>Sterck, Olivier</dc:contributor>
    <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/42"/>
    <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
    <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">China’s involvement in African countries has been criticized for being guided by self-interest rather than recipient need or merit. For the period 2000–2012, we compare China’s aid allocation behaviour to that of the five largest donor countries globally: France, Germany, Japan, the UK, and the USA. We use regression analysis and a rigorous variance decomposition method to measure the importance of various factors in predicting aid commitments. We find that donors differ markedly in how they allocate aid. While Germany, Japan, the USA, and the UK assign high importance to recipient need, France’s and China’s allocation models are, for a large part, driven by variables that relate to self-interest: trade in the case of France, and the adherence to the “One-China policy” in the case of China. However, China is not a purely selfish donor. As most Western donors, China commits more aid to poorer countries. Furthermore, we find no evidence that commercial interests, such as trade or access to natural resources, determine Chinese aid allocation. This latter result contrasts with Western donors, which allocate more aid to their trade partners. France and the UK also commit significantly more aid to their former colonies. In conclusion, the claim that China’s aid allocation is different must be qualified.</dcterms:abstract>
    <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
    <dcterms:title>Is Chinese aid different?</dcterms:title>
    <dc:creator>Hoeffler, Anke</dc:creator>
    <dc:contributor>Hoeffler, Anke</dc:contributor>
    <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-05-05T09:01:01Z</dcterms:available>
    <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/57429"/>
    <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/"/>
    <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/57429/3/Hoeffler_2-mbapytnqrwz80.pdf"/>
    <dc:creator>Sterck, Olivier</dc:creator>
    <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
    <dcterms:issued>2022-08</dcterms:issued>
    <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/57429/3/Hoeffler_2-mbapytnqrwz80.pdf"/>
  </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

Interner Vermerk

xmlui.Submission.submit.DescribeStep.inputForms.label.kops_note_fromSubmitter

Kontakt
URL der Originalveröffentl.

Prüfdatum der URL

Prüfungsdatum der Dissertation

Finanzierungsart

Kommentar zur Publikation

Allianzlizenz
Corresponding Authors der Uni Konstanz vorhanden
Internationale Co-Autor:innen
Universitätsbibliographie
Ja
Begutachtet
Ja
Diese Publikation teilen