Partner of Choice: Australian National Interest in Infrastructure Development Programs in Papua New Guinea

ABSTRACT Australian‐funded development programs aim to support the needs of partner governments but ultimately advance Australiaʼs national interests. This research unpacks this discourse on the major Australian‐funded infrastructure development programs in Papua New Guinea. It has two key findings: first, the way program reporting speaks about geopolitics is implicit, while partnerships are made explicit. DFAT speaks between the lines on geopolitics in aid. Yet, external media and the aid community outside government bureaucracy are quick to speculate about links between the two. Second, political “goals” are achieved everywhere, and not through DFAT effort alone. In this dataset, individual advisers are a key vector of this under‐reported influence. They often perform as political actors despite their position outside formal aid structures. Ultimately, actors are aware of the many aims of the aid program yet seem to make only a certain portion explicit and visible, just to ensure things work in practice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies
Published
2024-11-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.70003
Primary Topic
International Development and Aid
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Partner of Choice: Australian National Interest in Infrastructure Development Programs in Papua New Guinea

Lucy Pennington
Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies
International Development and Aid
article

Partner of Choice: Australian National Interest in Infrastructure Development Programs in Papua New Guinea

Lucy Pennington
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Australian‐funded development programs aim to support the needs of partner governments but ultimately advance Australiaʼs national interests. This research unpacks this discourse on the major Australian‐funded infrastructure development programs in Papua New Guinea. It has two key findings: first, the way program reporting speaks about geopolitics is implicit, while partnerships are made explicit. DFAT speaks between the lines on geopolitics in aid. Yet, external media and the aid community outside government bureaucracy are quick to speculate about links between the two. Second, political “goals” are achieved everywhere, and not through DFAT effort alone. In this dataset, individual advisers are a key vector of this under‐reported influence. They often perform as political actors despite their position outside formal aid structures. Ultimately, actors are aware of the many aims of the aid program yet seem to make only a certain portion explicit and visible, just to ensure things work in practice.

Asia & the Pacific Policy StudiesVol. 12(1)
Australian National University (AU)
Partnerships for the goals
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
International Development and Aid
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.