No description available.

This study analyses which factors has driven the allocation of Swedish aid between 1975 and 2003. The results are then compared to the official policy. The general goal of Swedish aid is to “help to raise the living standard for the poor”, but there are more factors than income status that affect allocation. Allocation of Swedish aid is affected by a set of criteria for the choice of recipient. The details and the goals of aid have changed over time even if the core has remained the same. According to the official policy, Swedish aid should be used to take responsibility across borders, to contribute to a greater common market and a peaceful development. It has been considered important that the recipients’ needs can be matched by Sweden’s capacity and that aid is developed from the recipients’ situation. The recipients’ absorption capacity is thus an important criterion. Summarized, Swedish aid should be used to promote democracy, fight corruption and contribute to more equal societies. In this study we do not find any significant relation between the official policy and actual allocation. A Generalized Least Square regression with Random Effects points out only two significant variables, the recipients’ size of trade (openness) and their former (British) colonial status. Instead of rewarding open economies, Swedish aid has been allocated to more closed economies which tend to be more corrupt. Although the majority of the recipient countries are former colonies, we find that former British colonies are favoured. This allocation is believed to be a result of the historical development of aid and practical circumstances such as language etc... / Denna studie analyserar vilka faktorer som har drivit Svenskt bistånd mellan 1975 och 2003. Resultaten jämförs sedan med officiell policy. Det allmänna målet med Svensk bistånd enligt officiell policy är att ”hjälpa till att höja levnadsstandarden för de fattiga”, men det finns fler faktorer än inkomstnivå som påverkar allokeringen. Allokering av svenskt bistånd påverkas av bestämda "länderkriteria". Detaljerna och biståndets mål har förändrats över tiden även om kärnan har varit densamma. Enligt officiell policy så ska svenskt bistånd användas för att ta ansvar som sträcker sig över gränserna, för att bidra till en större gemensam marknad samt en fredlig utveckling. Det har ansetts vara viktigt att mottagarnas behov kan mötas av Sveriges kapacitet och att biståndet är sammansatt utifrån mottagarnas situation. Mottagarnas absorptionskapacitet är således det ett viktigt kriterium. Sammanfattningsvis ska svenskt bistånd främja demokrati, kämpa mot korruption och bidra till att samhällen blir mer jämställda. I denna studie finner vi inget signifikant samband mellan den officiella policyn och faktisk allokering. En ”Generalized Least Square Random Effects” regression påvisar blott två signifikanta variabler; mottagarnas handelsvidd (öppenhet) och deras före detta koloniala (Brittiska) status. Istället för att belöna öppna ekonomier har svensk bistånd allokerats till mer stängda ekonomier som tenderar att vara mer korrupta. Trots att majoriteten av mottagarländerna är före detta kolonier är de Brittiska kolonierna favoriserade. Denna allokering tros vara ett resultat av biståndets historiska utveckling och praktiska omständigheter, så som språk etc…

<p>This study analyses which factors has driven the allocation of Swedish aid between 1975 and 2003. The results are then compared to the official policy. The general goal of Swedish aid is to “help to raise the living standard for the poor”, but there are more factors than income status that affect allocation.</p><p>Allocation of Swedish aid is affected by a set of criteria for the choice of recipient. The details and the goals of aid have changed over time even if the core has remained the same. According to the official policy, Swedish aid should be used to take responsibility across borders, to contribute to a greater common market and a peaceful development. It has been considered important that the recipients’ needs can be matched by Sweden’s capacity and that aid is developed from the recipients’ situation. The recipients’ absorption capacity is thus an important criterion. Summarized, Swedish aid should be used to promote democracy, fight corruption and contribute to more equal societies.</p><p>In this study we do not find any significant relation between the official policy and actual allocation. A Generalized Least Square regression with Random Effects points out only two significant variables, the recipients’ size of trade (openness) and their former (British) colonial status.</p><p>Instead of rewarding open economies, Swedish aid has been allocated to more closed economies which tend to be more corrupt. Although the majority of the recipient countries are former colonies, we find that former British colonies are favoured. This allocation is believed to be a result of the historical development of aid and practical circumstances such as language etc...</p> / <p>Denna studie analyserar vilka faktorer som har drivit Svenskt bistånd mellan 1975 och 2003. Resultaten jämförs sedan med officiell policy. Det allmänna målet med Svensk bistånd enligt officiell policy är att ”hjälpa till att höja levnadsstandarden för de fattiga”, men det finns fler faktorer än inkomstnivå som påverkar allokeringen.</p><p>Allokering av svenskt bistånd påverkas av bestämda "länderkriteria". Detaljerna och biståndets mål har förändrats över tiden även om kärnan har varit densamma. Enligt officiell policy så ska svenskt bistånd användas för att ta ansvar som sträcker sig över gränserna, för att bidra till en större gemensam marknad samt en fredlig utveckling. Det har ansetts vara viktigt att mottagarnas behov kan mötas av Sveriges kapacitet och att biståndet är sammansatt utifrån mottagarnas situation. Mottagarnas absorptionskapacitet är således det ett viktigt kriterium. Sammanfattningsvis ska svenskt bistånd främja demokrati, kämpa mot korruption och bidra till att samhällen blir mer jämställda.</p><p>I denna studie finner vi inget signifikant samband mellan den officiella policyn och faktisk allokering. En ”Generalized Least Square Random Effects” regression påvisar blott två signifikanta variabler; mottagarnas handelsvidd (öppenhet) och deras före detta koloniala (Brittiska) status.</p><p>Istället för att belöna öppna ekonomier har svensk bistånd allokerats till mer stängda ekonomier som tenderar att vara mer korrupta. Trots att majoriteten av mottagarländerna är före detta kolonier är de Brittiska kolonierna favoriserade. Denna allokering tros vara ett resultat av biståndets historiska utveckling och praktiska omständigheter, så som språk etc…</p>

Webpage design is an important factor in the capturing of new donor populations and increasing charitable giving. Charities often use emotional appeals when soliciting donations but little is known about the effects of embedding different verbal triggers directly into donation buttons. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of three emotional triggers on donor compliance, donation amount and trust in the charity. A between-groups experimental design was used to test six hypotheses regarding the impact of social approval, empowerment, and guilt on donor compliance, donation amount and trust in the charity. Eighty students completed the research protocol using a simulated online donating platform. The hypotheses were not supported and the implications of the findings are discussed within the context of the strengths and limitations of the research design.

In an attempt to improve the effectiveness of aid, many of the stakeholders in the international aid regime agreed to commit to five key principles in the Paris Declaration (PD) in 2005. These principles of ownership, alignment, harmonisation, managing for results and mutual accountability were aimed at improving the effective delivery and use of aid, although the Declaration has been followed by continuing doubts over aid effectiveness, especially in the context of deficiencies in donor cooperation and coordination and weak recipient ownership. Since the PD, donors have made varying efforts when it comes to implementing the Paris requirements towards greater aid effectiveness. However, after two OECD DAC monitoring surveys, in 2006 and in 2008, donors and recipients found out that the overall result of the progress of the implementation has been slow and that donor behavioural change towards implementing the PD has differed. In the light of this, this research aims to examine how donors have implemented the PD and why there are such differences in donor behaviour based on a comparative study of Sweden, the United Kingdom (UK), South Korea and China in Tanzania. This thesis reveals that there are key differences between advanced donors (Sweden and the UK) and emerging donors (Korea and China), particularly in terms of their levels of behavioural change in implementing the PD. While Sweden and the UK have shown greater progress in implementing many of the protocols of the PD, Korea and China have barely implemented the Paris requirements. The findings of this research highlight that the uneven responses and outcomes of the PD implementation are due to the design of the PD, which was based on the existing aid delivery mechanism of traditional donors at its top level, and the Paris requirements have not considered the bottom level reality of emerging donors who have different aid mechanisms from traditional donors. By examining seven major factors which inform the uneven donor performance (aid amount and number of staff, aid history of donors, political commitments, action plans and country specific strategies, aid management systems, aid modalities, and monitoring and evaluation), this study argues that the PD has been an 'easy option' for traditional donors such as Sweden and the UK, while it requires radical changes for emerging donors such as Korea and China. While this research relies on the public policy implementation theories to explain uneven donor behaviour in the PD implementation process, there has been less focus on the political economy and the self-interests and motivations of donors, which remains a main limitation of the study. Given this, this research has suggested conducting a further study on donor behaviour with a new methodological focus on the political economy and donor self-interests.