The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Increasing Selectivity of Foreign Aid, 1984–2002
Open accessAbstract
The authors examine the allocation of foreign aid by 41 donor agencies, bilateral and multilateral. Their policy selectivity index measures the extent to which a donor's assistance is targeted to countries with sound institutions and policies, controlling for per capita income and population. The poverty selectivity index analogously looks at how well a donor's assistance is targeted to poor countries, controlling for institutional and policy environment as measured by a World Bank index. The authors' main finding is that the same group of multilateral and bilateral aid agencies that are very policy focused are also very poverty focused. The donors that appear high up in both rankings are the World Bank's International Development Association, the International Monetary Fund's Enhanced Structural Adjustment Facility, Denmark, the United Kingdom, Norway, Ireland, and the Netherlands. As a robustness check the authors alternatively use institutional quality measures independent of the World Bank and find the same pattern of selectivity. They also find that policy selectivity is a new phenomenon: in the 1984-89 period, aid overall was allocated indiscriminately without any consideration to the quality of governance, whereas in the 1990s there was a clear relationship between aid and governance (institutions and policies). This increasing selectivity of aid is good news for aid effectiveness. The bad news is that the aid agencies that the authors survey vary greatly in size. Some donors that are largest in absolute size, such as France and the United States, are not particularly selective. Japan comes in high on the policy selectivity index but far down on the poverty selectivity index, reflecting its pattern of giving large amounts of aid in Asia to countries that are well governed but in many cases not poor.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Forgotten Rationale for Policy Reform: The Productivity of Investment Projects
Isham, J., & Kaufmann, D. (1999) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355399555972 · Cited by 191
Cited by
Changing aid regimes? U.S. foreign aid from the Cold War to the War on Terror
Fleck, R. K., & Kilby, C. (2010) · Journal of Development Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2009.09.011 · Cited by 297
Razafindrakoto, M., & Roubaud, F. (2010) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2010.02.004 · Cited by 261
Weiler, F., Klöck, C., & Dornan, M. (2018) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.11.001 · Cited by 257
Metadata
- Authors
- Dollar, D., & Levin, V.
- Venue
- World Bank, Washington, DC eBooks
- Publisher
- World Bank, Washington, D.C.
- Published
- 2004-05
- OpenAlex
- W2073744659
- Cited by
- 293
- References
- 1
- Type
- report
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Increasing Selectivity of Foreign Aid, 1984–2002. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1596/1813-9450-3299
- The paper
- Dollar, D., & Levin, V. (2004). The Increasing Selectivity of Foreign Aid, 1984–2002. World Bank, Washington, DC eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-3299
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.