Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorVillanger, Espen
dc.date.accessioned2008-02-22T11:13:38Z
dc.date.accessioned2017-03-29T09:13:29Z
dc.date.available2008-02-22T11:13:38Z
dc.date.available2017-03-29T09:13:29Z
dc.date.issued2003
dc.identifier.isbn82-8062-050-8
dc.identifier.issn0804-3639
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2436148
dc.description.abstractWhen donors enforce conditionality upon recipients who do not implement the conditions, companies can suffer from cancellation of their contracts with the recipient when aid dries up. A strategic recipient may avoid implementing controversial conditions by only granting a contract to a company that puts pressure on the donor to keep aid flowing. In our model, each of these three agents takes account of each of the two other agents’ actions. We show that this triadic structure can be crucial when explaining recipients’ use of companies to influence donors to give aid unconditionally, and offer a time-consistent explanation for the failure of conditionality.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherChr. Michelsen Institute
dc.relation.ispartofseriesCMI Working paper
dc.relation.ispartofseriesWP 2003: 4
dc.subjectTriadic
dc.subjectForeign aid
dc.subjectCredibility
dc.subjectFungibility
dc.subjectSamarian's dilemma
dc.subjectJEL classification: E61, F35
dc.titleCompany influence on foreign aid disbursement: Is conditionality credible when donors have mixed motives?
dc.typeWorking paper


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel