Traditional Donors in Information and Communi- cation Sector Development Assistance
Abstract
The paper examines activities of ‘traditional’ donors of official development assistance (ODA) in the information and communication technologies (ICTs) sector. The author assesses the major quantitative parameters of aid flows and their dynamics for the past two decades, examines the distribution of aid across donor and recipient countries, as well as considers the issues of tied aid and conditionality. The research is based on the OECD DAC data at the project level for the period 1995–2007. The author identifies three major donors: Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the United States. For Japan and the Republic of Korea the key partners and recipients in the ICTs sector include their closest neighbours — the Southeast Asian countries (Vietnam, Sri Lanka, etc.) As for the United States development assistance, it is primarily distributed to those states where the US and its allies have imposed regime change (Iraq and Afghanistan) or, to a lesser extent, to their strategic partners, such as Egypt. The author notes that the overall trend towards further untying of aid is unlikely to have a significant impact on the ICTs sector. The author also emphasizes that traditional donors, with the exception of Japan and the Republic of Korea, tend to favour funding assistance through multilateral channels, such as various European Union institutions and the World Bank. This trend may be explained by the ineffectiveness of many ICTs development assistance projects, which forces donors to diversify risks by shifting the responsibility for possible failures on the international organizations. However, the author concludes that the emergence of non-traditional donors, especially China, the use of tied aid as a means to capture new markets, as well as the constant desire to influence the domestic policies of recipient countries, may draw attention of the traditional donors back to the ICTs sector, especially considering the increasing competition in the 5G marketplace.
About the Author
Z. E. Gomboin
Lomonosov Moscow State University; Radio Research and Development Institute
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Zorikto E. Gomboin — PhD Candidate at the Chair of International Organizations and World Political Processes, School of World Politics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Expert of the Center for Security and Development Studies, International Legal Protection Engineer II at the Radio Research and Development Institute
Leninskie gory 1, 119991, Moscow
Kazakova 16, 105094, Moscow
References
1. Ashmyanskaya I.S. 2011. Inostrannaya pomoshch’ razvitiyu v sfere informatsionno-kommunikatsionnykh tekhnologii [Foreign development aid in the area of information and communication technologies]. MGIMO Review of International Relations, no. 5, pp. 77–86. (In Russ.)
2. Bartenev V.I. 2011. Vliyanie sobytii 11 sentyabrya 2001 g. na politiku SShA v sfere sodeistviya mezhdunarodnomu razvitiyu [The impact of the 9/11 on the U.S. international development cooperation policy]. Moscow University Bulletin of World Politics, no. 3, pp. 184–218. (In Russ.)
3. Bartenev V.I. 2018. Pomoshch’ ‘khrupkim gosudarstvam’ skvoz’ prizmu riskmenedzhmenta: labirint ob”yasnitel’nykh gipotez [Aiding ‘fragile states’ through the lens of risk management: Labyrinth of explanatory hypotheses]. International Trends, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 20–41. (In Russ.)
4. Glazunova E.N. 2014. Teoreticheskie aspekty sodeistviya mezhdunarodnomu razvitiyu: sovremennyi diskurs [Theoretical aspects of international development cooperation: Contemporary discourse]. Moscow University Bulletin of World Politics, no. 2, pp. 3–33. (In Russ.)
5. Gomboin Z.E. 2018. Informatsionno-kommunikatsionnye tekhnologii dlya razvitiya: logika evolyutsii mezhdunarodnogo diskursa [Information and communication technologies for development: Evolution of international discourse]. Moscow University Bulletin of World Politics, no. 3, pp. 121–153. (In Russ.)
6. Perfil’eva O.V. 2007. Problema tsifrovogo razryva i mezhdunarodnye initsiativy po ee preodoleniyu [Getting over digital divide: The international organizations contribution]. International Organizations Research Journal, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 34–48. (In Russ.)
7. Baranovskii V., Kvashnin Yu., Toganova N. (eds.). 2018. Sodeistvie mezhdunarodnomu razvitiyu kak instrument vneshnei politiki: zarubezhnyi opyt [International development assistance as foreign policy tool: Foreign experience]. Moscow, IMEMO RAN Publ. (In Russ.)
8. Araki M. 2007. Japan’s official development assistance: The Japan ODA model that began life in Southeast Asia. Asia-Pacific Review, no. 2 (14), pp. 17–29.
9. Berthelemy J.-C. 2006. Bilateral donors’ interest vs. recipients’ development motives in aid allocation: Do all donors behave the same? Review of Development Economics, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 179–194.
10. Burgers I., Mosquera I. 2017. Corporate taxation and BEPS: A fair slice for developing countries? Erasmus Law Review, no. 1 (10), pp. 29–47. DOI: 10.5553/ELR.000077
11. Chung S., Eom Y.H., Jung H.J. 2016. Why untie aid? An empirical analysis of the determinants of South Korea’s untied aid from 2010 to 2013: South Korea’s untied aid. Journal of International Development, no. 4 (28), pp. 552–568. DOI: 10.1002/jid.3195
12. Clyde M. 2005. CRS Issue brief for Congress — Egypt–United States relations. Congressional Research Service. Washington.
13. Díaz Andrade A., Urquhart C. 2012. Unveiling the modernity bias: A critical examination of the politics of ICT4D. Information Technology for Development, no. 4 (18), pp. 281–292. DOI: 10.1080/02681102.2011.643204
14. Friederici N., Ojanperä S., Graham M. 2017. The impact of connectivity in Africa: Grand visions and the mirage of inclusive digital development. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, no. 1 (79), pp. 1–20. DOI: 10.1002/j.1681-4835.2017.tb00578.x
15. Greenberg A. 2008. Sida’s support to information and communications technologies (ICT) for development. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/derec/sweden/41445473.pdf (accessed: 17.07.2019).
16. Howland J. 1998. The ‘digital divide’: Are we becoming a world of technological ‘haves’ and ‘have nots?’ The Electronic Library, no. 5 (16), pp. 287–289. DOI: 10.1108/eb045651
17. Kato H., Page J., Shimomura Y. (eds.). 2016. Japan’s development assistance. London, Palgrave Macmillan.
18. Lee H. 2008. Analysing South Korea’s ICT for development aid programme. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 1–15.
19. Marker P., McNamara K., Wallace L. 2002. The significance of information and communication technologies for reducing poverty. DfID. Available at: http://kambing.ui.ac.id/onnopurbo/library/library-ref-ind/ref-ind-1/application/povertyreduction/!%20ICT4PR/ict_poverty.pdf (accessed: 17.07.2019).
20. Picciotto S. 2015. The U.K.’s diverted profits tax: An admission of defeat or a pre-emptive strike? Tax Notes International, no. 3 (77), pp. 239–242.
21. Raiti G.C. 2007. The lost sheep of ICT4D literature. Information Technologies and International Development, vol. 3, no. 4. pp. 1–8. DOI: 10.1162/itid.2007.3.4.1.
22. Schopf J. 2019. Room for improvement: Why Korea’s leading ICT ODA program has failed to combat corruption’. Telecommunications Policy, vol. 43, no. 6, pp. 501–519. DOI: 10.1016/j.telpol.2019.01.001.
23. Steinmueller W.E. 2001. ICTs and the possibilities for leapfrogging by developing countries. International Labour Review, no. 2 (140), pp. 193–210.
24. Strange A.M., Mengfan C., Brooke R. et al. 2017. AidData methodology: Tracking underreported financial flows (TUFF). William and Mary College AidData Laboratory. Available at: http://docs.aiddata.org/ad4/pdfs/AidDataTUFF_Methodology_1.3.pdf (accessed: 03.06.2019).
25. Winner L. 1980. Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, vol. 109, no. 1, pp. 121–136.
26. Ya’u Y.Z. 2004. The new imperialism & Africa in the global electronic village. Review of African Political Economy, vol. 31, no. 99, pp. 11–29.
Review
For citations:
Gomboin Z.E. Traditional Donors in Information and Communi- cation Sector Development Assistance. Lomonosov World Politics Journal. 2019;11(4):114-136. (In Russ.)
Views:
227
Email this article 