When aid misses the target: competing objectives, new classifications, and smarter delivery

• Allocation of aid reflects various donor motives. • Evidence that aid promotes growth is limited. • Aid is effective in some areas favored by donors. • Donor motives mediate the effectiveness of aid. Western donors allocate over US$ 200 billion annually to official development assistance (ODA), yet much of this funding serves goals other than sustained recipient‑country development. In this paper, I argue that competing objectives and uses—including in‑donor refugee costs, geopolitical interests, and commercial ties—and inflated aid budgets undermine ODA’s credibility. I then argue for a narrow, development‑focused definition of ODA that excludes humanitarian relief and global public goods and suggest that concentrating development aid on infrastructure, education, and health—linked to a small number of ex ante conditions and delivering it primarily through budget support in democracies—would improve alignment with recipient priorities, bolster government accountability, and maximize developmental impact.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
World Development
Published
2025-09-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2025.107159
Citations
1
Primary Topic
International Development and Aid
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.45
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

When aid misses the target: competing objectives, new classifications, and smarter delivery

Axel Dreher
1 citations
World Development
International Development and Aid
3.45
article

When aid misses the target: competing objectives, new classifications, and smarter delivery

Axel Dreher
article en
1 citations

Abstract

• Allocation of aid reflects various donor motives. • Evidence that aid promotes growth is limited. • Aid is effective in some areas favored by donors. • Donor motives mediate the effectiveness of aid. Western donors allocate over US$ 200 billion annually to official development assistance (ODA), yet much of this funding serves goals other than sustained recipient‑country development. In this paper, I argue that competing objectives and uses—including in‑donor refugee costs, geopolitical interests, and commercial ties—and inflated aid budgets undermine ODA’s credibility. I then argue for a narrow, development‑focused definition of ODA that excludes humanitarian relief and global public goods and suggest that concentrating development aid on infrastructure, education, and health—linked to a small number of ex ante conditions and delivering it primarily through budget support in democracies—would improve alignment with recipient priorities, bolster government accountability, and maximize developmental impact.

World DevelopmentVol. 196
Center for Economic and Policy Research (US), Heidelberg University (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
International Development and Aid
3.45
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.

When aid misses the target: competing objectives, new classifications, and smarter delivery — Axel Dreher · World Development (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS