Aid Conditionality and Views of Donor and Recipient Publics toward Each Other

• In Event: Foreign Aid and Public Opinion

Abstract

When donor countries give foreign aid, how are donor intentions being perceived by recipients? Is there a gap between donor intentions vs. recipient perceptions? This is an important question because such a gap might have an impact on aid effectiveness. Existing research studies donor and recipient public opinions separately, however, to understand how donor and recipient public opinions affect each other, it is necessary to study them together. One way to do this is to look at how aid conditionality affects both recipient and donor public attitudes toward each other.

This study examines US aid to Africa from the perspectives of both recipient and donor public opinions. First, this study explores the relationship between African views toward aid conditions and support for the US by conducting a descriptive analysis of Afrobarometer survey data (Round 8 (2019/2021). The descriptive analysis shows that Africans who oppose the strict democracy aid conditions that the US attaches to its aid may also have negative views toward the US.

Second, using data from an original survey experiment, this study analyzes how learning about African public’s opposition to strict democracy aid conditions affects American public support for aid to Africa. This study finds that when American survey respondents are given this information, they are more likely to lower their support for US aid to Africa. Consistent with existing literature, the study finds that Republican respondents are less likely to support US aid to Africa. Furthermore, when respondents are asked about the best way to improve the image of the US, there is large response rate difference between the treatment and control groups that chose the option to relax the aid conditions on democracy and human rights. However, no such difference can be seen for the Republican subgroup. Instead, the most popular option among Republicans for both the treatment and the control groups is to give aid only to countries that agree with democratic values.

The implication of the results of this study might be severe for the aid recipient countries. Under the “default” scenario, the American public might support aid with democracy conditions because they believe they are beneficial for the recipient countries and good for the US’ image. Meanwhile, many Africans oppose such strict aid conditions and this may even be related to negative attitudes about the US. This might suggest that there is a gap between American intention and African perception. However, once the American public becomes aware of the African public’s opposition toward the strict democracy conditions, they might be quick to withdraw support for aid to Africa. From the recipient countries’ perspective, losing aid might be worse than having to fulfill conditions to receive aid or having aid projects that may not necessarily be effective. Therefore, recipient governments might be incentivized to hide public frustration in the face of donor governments. While there are a number of limitations, this study highlights the importance of studying the interactive views between recipient publics and donor publics.

Author

• Haruna Minoura, The University of Texas at Dallas