Review
PDF Zotero Mendeley EndNote BibTex Cite

Traditional Development Assistance Understanding A Critical Overview

Year 2020, Volume 15, Issue 1, 5410 - 5437, 30.06.2020
https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.690706

Abstract

Development assistance, theoretically and in its simplest definition, is the support provided to underdeveloped countries by developed countries through the transfer of resources. However, the Western centered perspective (the West and the rest) based on this developed and underdeveloped contrast creates a power imbalance between countries in terms of particularly political, economic and military areas. And this leads to a sort of patronage and hierarchy between the donor and beneficiary countries. The fact that the countries with the most military power in various regions of the world are the leading donor countries at the same time is a concrete manifestation of this situation.
The political, economic and military imbalance in question also constitutes the source of the patronage relationship between the donor and beneficiary countries. Thanks to this relationship, the donor countries builds their zones of influence in which they pursue their own interests. Even the smallest tension occurring between the donor and beneficiary countries may cause the beneficiary countries experience serious political and economic problems. The hierarchical superiority of the donor countries makes it compulsory for the beneficiary countries to unconditionally accept the approach and policies adopted by the donor countries. This situation which causes the demands and priorities of the donor countries to be of secondary importance is the biggest problem resulting from the conventional understanding of development assistance.
In this study, the appearance of the conventional understanding of development assistance in question and its historical development/transformation process are explained and the strategies and policies adopted by the donor countries with this type of development assistance understanding are examined in the contest of the development assistance they provide. Furthermore, the relationship which the donor countries establish with the countries they provide development assistance is also discussed within the scope of the study. Some sample countries chosen among the donors which are the subject of the controversy regarding the issue are also important in terms of demonstrating the way in which the controversy in question is actually reflected on the field. In choosing the sample countries, it was aimed to select the countries which first adopted the conventional understanding of development assistance that appeared in the late 1950’s and which represent the structural and institutional transformation in terms of historical development.

References

  • AidFlows (2020a) 08.02.2020 tarihinde https://www.aidflow.org/donör-view/the-netherlands-official-development-assistance adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • AidFlows (2020b) 28.02.2020 tarihinde https://www.aidflow.org/donör-view/france-official-development-assistance adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Alagöz, M. (2004) Sürdürülebilir kalkınmanın paradigması. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 4(8), 1-23.
  • Alesina, A. ve Dollar, D. (2000) Who gives foreign aid to whom and why? Journal of Economic Growth, 5(1), 33-63.
  • Alesina, A. ve Weder, B. (2002) Do corrupt governments receive less foreign aid?, American Economic Review, 92(4) 1126-1137.
  • Arslan, Hacı Mahmut (2015), Kalkınma işbirliğinde donörlerin karşılaştırılması ve Türkiye için öneriler. Uzmanlık Tezi T. C. Kalkınma Bakanlığı Sosyal Sektörler ve Koordinasyon Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara
  • Clay, E., Geddes, M. ve Natalı, L. (2009) Untying Aid: Is it working? An Evaluation of the Implementation of the Paris Declaration and of the DAC Recommendation of Untying ODA to the LDCs. Danish Institute for International Studies, Copenhagen.
  • Craig, D. ve Porter, D. (2003) Poverty reduction strategy papers: A new convergence. World Development, 31(1), 53-64.
  • Dollar, D., ve Svenson, J. (2000) What explains the success or failure of structural adjustment programmes? The Economic Journal, 110(466), 894-917.
  • Donor Tracker (2019). France donor profile. 28.12.2019 tarihinde https://donortracker.org/sites/default/files/donor_pdfs/DonorTracker_Profile_France_2019_0.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Dreher, A., Nunnenkamp, P. ve Thiele, R. (2011) Are 'new' donors different? comparing the allocation of bilateral aid between Non-DAC and DAC donor countries. World Development, 39(11), 1950-1968.
  • Easterly, W. (2007) The white man's burden: Why the west's efforts to aid the rest have done so much ıll and so little good?. New York, Penguin Books.
  • Easterly, W. ve Pfutze,T. (2008) Where does the money go? Best and worst practices in foreign aid. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(2), 29-52.
  • ECI (2013) About global partnership ınitiative, 05.01.2020 tarihinde http://effectivecooperation.org/related-initiatives-2/ adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Ehrenfeld, D. (2004) Foreign aid effectiveness, political rights and bilateral distribution. The Journal of Humanitarian Assistance, https://sites.tufts.edu/jha/archives/75
  • France Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs (2019). Development - “The French and France’s development assistance policy” barometer. 28.12.2019 tarihinde https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/french-foreign-policy/development-assistance/news/events-2015/article/development-the-french-and-france-s-development-assistance-policy- barometer-09 adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Führer, H. (1996) A history of the development assistance committee and the development co-operation directorate in dates, names and figures. OECD, OC/GD 67 (94), http://www.oecd.org/dac/1896816.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Gökgöz, Ç., (2015). Kalkınma işbirliğinin yönetimi: Türkiye için model önerisi ve uygulama önerileri. Uzmanlık Tezi T. C. Kalkınma Bakanlığı Sosyal Sektörler ve Koordinasyon Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara
  • Hoebink, P. (1999) The humanitarianisation of the foreign aid programme in Netherlands. European Journal of Development Research, 11(1), 176-202, London.
  • Kharas, H. J. ve Fengler, W. (2010) Delivering aid differently: Lessons from the Field. Washington D.C:Brooking Institution Press, 3-14.
  • Lancester C. (2007) Foreign aid: Diplomacy, development domestic politics. The Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 30-91.
  • Law Library of Congress (2011) Regulation of foreign aid in selected countries 2011/2012. Global Legal Research Center.
  • Mahmat, K., (2008) Küreselleşme sürecinde kalkınma yardımları: Orta Asya Cumhuriyetleri örneği. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Mannıng, R. (2006) Will 'emerging donors' change the face of ınternational cooperation? Development Policy Review, 24(4), 371- 385.
  • Mawdsley, E. (2014) From recipients to donors: Emerging powers and the changing development landscape, London:Zed Books, 48-68.
  • McMichael, P. (2012) Development and social change: A Global perspective. Los Angeles:Sage, 61-63.
  • MFA of Netherlands (2020). 31.01.2020 tarihinde https://www.government.nl/documents/parliamentary-documents/2014/03/05/government-response-to-the-interministerial- policy-review-towards-a-new-definition-of-development-cooperation-considerations-on adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Moyo, D. (2010) Dead aid: Why aid is not working and how there is a better way for Africa, Farrar. New York:Straus and Giroux, , 12-40.
  • OECD (2020) 08.02.2020 tarihinde https://data.oecd.org/oda/country-programmable-aid-cpa.htm#indicator-chart adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • OECD. (2011) Survey on monitoring the Paris Declaration. 22.11.2019 tarihinde http://www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/2011surveyonmonitoringtheparisdeclaration.htm adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Pettinger, T. (2017) Washington Consensus-Definition and Criticism. http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/7387/economics/washington-consensus-definition-and-criticism/ adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Sirolli, E. (1999) Ripples from the Zambezi: Passion, enterpreneurship and the rebirth of local economies. Gabriola Island, B.C:New Society Pulishers.
  • Six, C. (2009) The Rise of Post-colonial States as Donors: A Challenge to the Development Paradigm?. Third World Quarterly, 30(6), 1103- 1121.
  • Spıtz, G., Muskens, R., ve van Ewıjk, E. (2013) The Dutch and development cooperation: Ahead of the crowd or trailing behind?, NCDO, Amsterdam. http://www.ncdo.nl/sites/default/files/Report%20Analysis%20The%20Dutch%20and%20Development%20Cooperation%20FINAL%202013%2003%2004.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • UNDESA - United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, (2015) LDC ınformation: Graduation and transition process. 13.12.2019 tarihinde http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/cdp/ldc/ldc_graduated.shtm
  • USAID (2020a). Feed the future https://www.usaid.gov/feed-the-future/vision, 08.02.2020
  • USAID (2020b) 08.02.2020 tarihinde https://www.usaid.gov/who-we-are/usaid-history adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • USAID (2020c) 08.02.2020 tarihinde https://www.usaid.gov adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Wallerstein, I. (2006) European universalism: The rhetoric of power. New York:New Press.
  • Ziai, A. (2007) The meaning of development: A Critical Post-Culturalist Perspective. Journal Fur Entwicklungspolitik, 23(2), 64-65.

Geleneksel Kalkınma Yardımı Anlayışına Eleştirel Bir Bakış

Year 2020, Volume 15, Issue 1, 5410 - 5437, 30.06.2020
https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.690706

Abstract

Kalkınma yardımları en basit haliyle; kalkınmış ülkelerin, kalkınmamış ülkeleri, transfer ettikleri kaynaklar yoluyla desteklemeleridir. Ancak bahse konu kalkınmış ve kalkınmamış karşıtlığının dayanak noktası olan Batı merkezci bakış açısı, ülkeler arısında başta siyasi, ekonomik ve askeri olmak üzere bir güç dengesizliği ortaya çıkarmaktadır. Bu da donör ve faydalanıcı ülkeler arasında bir çeşit patronaj ve hiyerarşiye sebep olmaktadır. Dünya’nın farklı bölgelerinde en fazla askeri gücü olan ülkelerin, aynı zamanda en önde gelen donör ülkeler olması, bu durumun sahadaki somut tezahürüdür.
Bahse konu siyasi, ekonomik ve askeri güç dengesizliği, donör ve faydalanıcı ülkeler arasındaki patronaj ilişkisinin de kaynağını teşkil etmektedir. Donör ülkeler bu ilişki sayesinde, kendi çıkarlarını güttükleri nüfuz alanları oluşturmaktadırlar. Faydalanıcı ülkelerin, donör ülkelerle yaşayacağı en ufak bir gerilim bile bu ülkelerin siyasi ve ekonomik açıdan ciddi problemler yaşamasına sebep olabilmektedir. Donör ülkelerin sahip oldukları hiyerarşik üstünlük, bu ülkelerin benimsemiş oldukları anlayış ve politikaların, faydalanıcı ülkeler tarafından koşulsuz bir şekilde kabullenilmesini zaruri kılmaktadır. Faydalanıcı ülkelerin talep ve önceliklerinin ikinci planda kalmasına neden olan bu durum, teorik temelleri Rostow’un Aşamalı Kalkınma Modeline dayanan geleneksel kalkınma yardımı anlayışının ortaya çıkardığı en büyük problemdir.
Bu çalışmada, bahse konu geleneksel kalkınma yardımı anlayışının ortaya çıkışı ve tarihsel gelişim/dönüşüm süreci açıklanmakta ve bu anlayışı benimseyen donör ülkelerin sundukları kalkınma yardımları bağlamında sahip oldukları strateji ve politikalar incelenmektedir. Ayrıca, bahse konu donör ülkelerin, kalkınma yardımı faaliyeti yürüttükleri ülkelerle olan ilişkileri de bu çalışmada tartışılmaktadır. Söz konusu tartışmaların odağındaki donörler arasından seçilen bazı ülke örnekleri de bahse konu tartışmaların sahaya somut bir şekil nasıl yansıdığını göstermesi bakımından önem arz etmektedir. Örnek ülkeler belirlenirken, 1950’lerden sonra ortaya çıkan geleneksel kalkınma yardımları anlayışını benimseyen ilk ülkeler olmasına ve tarihsel olarak ortaya çıkan yapısal ve kurumsal dönüşümleri göstermelerine özen gösterilmiştir.

References

  • AidFlows (2020a) 08.02.2020 tarihinde https://www.aidflow.org/donör-view/the-netherlands-official-development-assistance adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • AidFlows (2020b) 28.02.2020 tarihinde https://www.aidflow.org/donör-view/france-official-development-assistance adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Alagöz, M. (2004) Sürdürülebilir kalkınmanın paradigması. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal ve Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 4(8), 1-23.
  • Alesina, A. ve Dollar, D. (2000) Who gives foreign aid to whom and why? Journal of Economic Growth, 5(1), 33-63.
  • Alesina, A. ve Weder, B. (2002) Do corrupt governments receive less foreign aid?, American Economic Review, 92(4) 1126-1137.
  • Arslan, Hacı Mahmut (2015), Kalkınma işbirliğinde donörlerin karşılaştırılması ve Türkiye için öneriler. Uzmanlık Tezi T. C. Kalkınma Bakanlığı Sosyal Sektörler ve Koordinasyon Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara
  • Clay, E., Geddes, M. ve Natalı, L. (2009) Untying Aid: Is it working? An Evaluation of the Implementation of the Paris Declaration and of the DAC Recommendation of Untying ODA to the LDCs. Danish Institute for International Studies, Copenhagen.
  • Craig, D. ve Porter, D. (2003) Poverty reduction strategy papers: A new convergence. World Development, 31(1), 53-64.
  • Dollar, D., ve Svenson, J. (2000) What explains the success or failure of structural adjustment programmes? The Economic Journal, 110(466), 894-917.
  • Donor Tracker (2019). France donor profile. 28.12.2019 tarihinde https://donortracker.org/sites/default/files/donor_pdfs/DonorTracker_Profile_France_2019_0.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Dreher, A., Nunnenkamp, P. ve Thiele, R. (2011) Are 'new' donors different? comparing the allocation of bilateral aid between Non-DAC and DAC donor countries. World Development, 39(11), 1950-1968.
  • Easterly, W. (2007) The white man's burden: Why the west's efforts to aid the rest have done so much ıll and so little good?. New York, Penguin Books.
  • Easterly, W. ve Pfutze,T. (2008) Where does the money go? Best and worst practices in foreign aid. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(2), 29-52.
  • ECI (2013) About global partnership ınitiative, 05.01.2020 tarihinde http://effectivecooperation.org/related-initiatives-2/ adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Ehrenfeld, D. (2004) Foreign aid effectiveness, political rights and bilateral distribution. The Journal of Humanitarian Assistance, https://sites.tufts.edu/jha/archives/75
  • France Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs (2019). Development - “The French and France’s development assistance policy” barometer. 28.12.2019 tarihinde https://www.diplomatie.gouv.fr/en/french-foreign-policy/development-assistance/news/events-2015/article/development-the-french-and-france-s-development-assistance-policy- barometer-09 adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Führer, H. (1996) A history of the development assistance committee and the development co-operation directorate in dates, names and figures. OECD, OC/GD 67 (94), http://www.oecd.org/dac/1896816.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Gökgöz, Ç., (2015). Kalkınma işbirliğinin yönetimi: Türkiye için model önerisi ve uygulama önerileri. Uzmanlık Tezi T. C. Kalkınma Bakanlığı Sosyal Sektörler ve Koordinasyon Genel Müdürlüğü, Ankara
  • Hoebink, P. (1999) The humanitarianisation of the foreign aid programme in Netherlands. European Journal of Development Research, 11(1), 176-202, London.
  • Kharas, H. J. ve Fengler, W. (2010) Delivering aid differently: Lessons from the Field. Washington D.C:Brooking Institution Press, 3-14.
  • Lancester C. (2007) Foreign aid: Diplomacy, development domestic politics. The Chicago:University of Chicago Press, 30-91.
  • Law Library of Congress (2011) Regulation of foreign aid in selected countries 2011/2012. Global Legal Research Center.
  • Mahmat, K., (2008) Küreselleşme sürecinde kalkınma yardımları: Orta Asya Cumhuriyetleri örneği. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi, Ankara.
  • Mannıng, R. (2006) Will 'emerging donors' change the face of ınternational cooperation? Development Policy Review, 24(4), 371- 385.
  • Mawdsley, E. (2014) From recipients to donors: Emerging powers and the changing development landscape, London:Zed Books, 48-68.
  • McMichael, P. (2012) Development and social change: A Global perspective. Los Angeles:Sage, 61-63.
  • MFA of Netherlands (2020). 31.01.2020 tarihinde https://www.government.nl/documents/parliamentary-documents/2014/03/05/government-response-to-the-interministerial- policy-review-towards-a-new-definition-of-development-cooperation-considerations-on adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Moyo, D. (2010) Dead aid: Why aid is not working and how there is a better way for Africa, Farrar. New York:Straus and Giroux, , 12-40.
  • OECD (2020) 08.02.2020 tarihinde https://data.oecd.org/oda/country-programmable-aid-cpa.htm#indicator-chart adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • OECD. (2011) Survey on monitoring the Paris Declaration. 22.11.2019 tarihinde http://www.oecd.org/dac/effectiveness/2011surveyonmonitoringtheparisdeclaration.htm adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Pettinger, T. (2017) Washington Consensus-Definition and Criticism. http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/7387/economics/washington-consensus-definition-and-criticism/ adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Sirolli, E. (1999) Ripples from the Zambezi: Passion, enterpreneurship and the rebirth of local economies. Gabriola Island, B.C:New Society Pulishers.
  • Six, C. (2009) The Rise of Post-colonial States as Donors: A Challenge to the Development Paradigm?. Third World Quarterly, 30(6), 1103- 1121.
  • Spıtz, G., Muskens, R., ve van Ewıjk, E. (2013) The Dutch and development cooperation: Ahead of the crowd or trailing behind?, NCDO, Amsterdam. http://www.ncdo.nl/sites/default/files/Report%20Analysis%20The%20Dutch%20and%20Development%20Cooperation%20FINAL%202013%2003%2004.pdf adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • UNDESA - United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, (2015) LDC ınformation: Graduation and transition process. 13.12.2019 tarihinde http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/policy/cdp/ldc/ldc_graduated.shtm
  • USAID (2020a). Feed the future https://www.usaid.gov/feed-the-future/vision, 08.02.2020
  • USAID (2020b) 08.02.2020 tarihinde https://www.usaid.gov/who-we-are/usaid-history adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • USAID (2020c) 08.02.2020 tarihinde https://www.usaid.gov adresinden erişilmiştir.
  • Wallerstein, I. (2006) European universalism: The rhetoric of power. New York:New Press.
  • Ziai, A. (2007) The meaning of development: A Critical Post-Culturalist Perspective. Journal Fur Entwicklungspolitik, 23(2), 64-65.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Sociology
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Esat İPEK (Primary Author)
ANKARA YILDIRIM BEYAZIT ÜNİVERSİTESİ
0000-0003-0440-9690
Türkiye


Erdal Tanas KARAGÖL
ANKARA YILDIRIM BEYAZIT ÜNİVERSİTESİ
0000-0003-0803-4064
Türkiye

Publication Date June 30, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020, Volume 15, Issue 1

Cite

APA İpek, E. & Karagöl, E. T. (2020). Geleneksel Kalkınma Yardımı Anlayışına Eleştirel Bir Bakış . OPUS International Journal of Society Researches , Vol: 15 - Issue: 10. Year Special Issue , 5410-5437 . DOI: 10.26466/opus.690706