Elites, the aid curse, and Chinese development finance: A conjoint survey experiment on elites’ aid preferences in 141 low‐ and middle‐income countries

Abstract Why do elites in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs) favor some foreign aid projects and partners over others? Research on the “aid curse” and Chinese development finance suggests elites should prefer aid that can be easily captured, with few conditionalities, regulations, or transparency requirements. We administer a conjoint survey experiment across 141 LMICs to elicit the aid preferences of elites who are uniquely close to development policy debates. Perhaps unsurprisingly, we find that elites favor larger over smaller projects, grants over loans, and transportation infrastructure projects over initiatives focused on civil society or tax collection capacity. But contrary to the aid curse theory, elites also prefer projects with transparent terms and labor, corruption, and environmental regulations, and are at worst indifferent towards good governance conditionalities. These preferences hold even in corrupt and autocratic countries and even among high‐level government officials who might be expected to favor “no‐strings‐attached” aid regimes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
American Journal of Political Science
Published
2024-11-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12926
Citations
2
Primary Topic
International Development and Aid
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.80
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Elites, the aid curse, and Chinese development finance: A conjoint survey experiment on elites’ aid preferences in 141 low‐ and middle‐income countries

Samantha Custer, Robert Blair, Philip Roessler
2 citations
American Journal of Political Science
International Development and Aid
2.80
article

Elites, the aid curse, and Chinese development finance: A conjoint survey experiment on elites’ aid preferences in 141 low‐ and middle‐income countries

Samantha Custer, Robert Blair, Philip Roessler
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Why do elites in low‐ and middle‐income countries (LMICs) favor some foreign aid projects and partners over others? Research on the “aid curse” and Chinese development finance suggests elites should prefer aid that can be easily captured, with few conditionalities, regulations, or transparency requirements. We administer a conjoint survey experiment across 141 LMICs to elicit the aid preferences of elites who are uniquely close to development policy debates. Perhaps unsurprisingly, we find that elites favor larger over smaller projects, grants over loans, and transportation infrastructure projects over initiatives focused on civil society or tax collection capacity. But contrary to the aid curse theory, elites also prefer projects with transparent terms and labor, corruption, and environmental regulations, and are at worst indifferent towards good governance conditionalities. These preferences hold even in corrupt and autocratic countries and even among high‐level government officials who might be expected to favor “no‐strings‐attached” aid regimes.

American Journal of Political ScienceVol. 69(4)
William & Mary (US), Williams (United States) (US), Brown University (US), Goldman Sachs (United States) (US), Policy Analysis (United States) (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
International Development and Aid
2.80
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.