Results-Based Financing (RBF) for Modern Energy Cooking Solutions: An Effective Driver for Innovation and Scale?

Results-based financing (RBF) programmes in the clean cooking sector have gained increasing donor interest over the last decade. Although the risks and advantages of RBF have been discussed quite extensively for other sectors, especially health services, there is limited research-documented experience of its application to clean cooking. Due to the sheer scale of the important transition from ‘dirty’ to clean cooking for the 4 billion people who lack access, especially in the Global South, efficient and performance-proven solutions are urgently required. This paper, undertaken as part of the work of the UKAid-funded Modern Energy Cooking Services (MECS) programme, aims to close an important research gap by reviewing evidence-based support mechanisms and documenting essential experiences from previous and ongoing RBF programmes in the clean cooking and other sectors. On this basis, the paper derives key strategic implications and learning lessons for the global scaling of RBF programmes and finds that qualitative key performance indicators such as consumer acceptance as well as longer-term monitoring are critical long-term success factors for RBF to ensure the continued uptake and use of clean cooking solutions (CCS), however securing the inclusion of these indicators within programmes remains challenging. Finally, by discussing the opportunities for the evolution of RBF into broader impact funding programmes and the integration of energy access and clean cooking strategies through multi-sector approaches, the paper illustrates potential steps to enhance the impact of RBF in this sector in the future.

Whose Vulnerability? Trauma Recovery in the Reintegration of Former Violent Extremists

Violent extremism has a trauma problem. Psychological trauma plays a role in the genesis, perpetration, and resolution of violent extremism. Despite evidence attesting to the positive effects of trauma-informed rehabilitation programs and trauma recovery support for armed combatants and criminal offenders, there has been limited donor interest or coordinated policy effort to meaningfully integrate trauma recovery into the design of rehabilitation and reintegration of violent extremists specifically. Research in global mental health confirms trauma is not only relevant to the emergence of violent extremism but is also a consequence of participation in violent extremism. While there is a general dearth of data on the psychobiological markers of trauma among extremist populations specifically, the limited data we have from child recruits, as well as from other conflict-affected populations calls for a more prominent role of psychological rehabilitation and trauma recovery in the reintegration of violent extremists.

Determinants of Bilateral REDD+ Cooperation Recipients in Kyoto Protocol Regime and Their Implications in Paris Agreement Regime

A cooperative approach for REDD+ between developing and developed countries can be a sound means to achieve national and global mitigation targets. To accomplish the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) of countries and the global 2 °C climate target more effectively, it is necessary to explore the coordination options, based on the understanding of bilateral REDD+ cooperation. This study explains the current status of bilateral REDD+ cooperation and investigates determinants affecting REDD+ recipient decisions of donor countries, by analyzing bilateral REDD+ arrangements, which has been promoted for 10 years under the the Kyoto Protocol regime from 2006 until 2015. The results show that Norway and Japan supported more than half of the total financial pledges for bilateral REDD+ projects for 10 years. Out of 87 REDD+ recipients, four countries—Brazil, India, Indonesia, and China—accounted for more than half of the 10-year financial pledges. Approximately 78% of total financing was found to be concentrated in the top 10 recipients. The aid darlings and orphans problem, the concentration of bilateral supports in a few developing countries and the exclusion of several developing countries from the recipient selection process, which has been discussed in ODA researches, was also observed. Applying a shared frailty model, recipient need, recipient merit, and donor interest was found to be the main determinants of donors’ REDD+ recipient decision. Donor interest and recipient merit were found to have more significant effects on the decision than recipient need. A balanced two-track approach is further required, in which, along with the bilateral REDD+ cooperation in the REDD+ darling countries, international organizations and multilateral funds for REDD+ need to increase financial accessibility, including the result-based compensation system for the REDD+ orphan countries.

Rangeland ecology.

Rangelands research in arid and semi-arid sub-Saharan Africa has been reinvigorated by renewed government and donor interest in pastoral livelihoods. The challenges facing productive rangelands remain competition over resources, which has been exacerbated by armed conflict; overuse of some rangelands as fragmentation continues; and the failure of many technical and governance interventions. The unresolved development challenges of pastoralism in East and West Africa make it essential to renew long-term empirical research to understand rangeland dynamics and to develop appropriate public policies. The rangelands research agenda at the International Livestock Research Institue focuses on: (i) governance for better rangeland management; (ii) monitoring rangeland conditions to improve development interventions; (iii) understanding the interactions between climate change and the rangelands; and (iv) improving rangelands productivity for pastoral resilience.

Development and Climate Aid to Africa: Comparing Aid Allocation Models for Different Aid Flows

This article examines the role different aid allocation models play not only for conventional development aid but also for two new financial flows, adaptation and mitigation aid. We first test the three models proposed in the literature – recipient need, recipient merit, and donor interests – using the latest available aid data and compare our results with findings of older studies on Africa, and with studies on aid allocation on a global scale. We find that the recipient merit model in more recent years no longer plays a role for development aid allocation in Africa, in line with findings reported globally. In contrast to such global studies, the logic of the donor interest model does not seem to dominate over the recipient need model in the African context, as both are of equal importance for aid allocation decisions. Finally, additionality seems to play a lesser role in Africa than globally.

Do Countries Use Foreign Aid to Buy Geopolitical Influence? Evidence from Donor Campaigns for Temporary UN Security Council Seats

In recent years, donor countries have increasingly used different aid allocation channels to boost aid effectiveness. One delivery channel that has grown tremendously is ‘multi-bi aid’—contributions to multilateral organizations earmarked for specific development purposes. This article examines whether donors use multi-bi aid to further their selfish goals—specifically, to garner political support for their ambition to become a temporary member of the UN Security Council. In this context, multi-bi aid is particularly beneficial to countries with limited experience as foreign aid donors; whose governance quality is weak; and which are more internationalized. Using a sample of OECD/DAC donor countries in 1995–2016, time-series cross-section analysis corroborates these arguments. The analysis draws on a new dataset of media reports proxying for donor interest in winning a temporary seat in the UN Security Council and extended data on multi-bi aid flows. The findings demonstrate that multi-bi aid may be a tool for geopolitical influence, with yet unexplored consequences for aid effectiveness.

Environmental Determinants of Chinese Development Finance in Africa

To what extent are decisions regarding Chinese investment in Africa motivated by environmental factors? A considerable body of work has examined the determinants of foreign aid among traditional donors, producing useful debates about the relative significance of recipient need or merit and donor interest. But far less scholarly effort has focused on the motivations of emerging donors and the role of environmental factors in influencing aid allocation. In an attempt to fill these gaps, this article uses statistical techniques to test the hypothesis that China deliberately invests in African countries with poor environmental performance for reasons related to recipient need or donor interest. Drawing upon project-level data regarding investments made by China in Africa from 2002 to 2012, the analysis suggests that Chinese development assistance grows commensurate with a country’s environmental performance, but only to a point. After a state achieves a certain level of environmental quality, Chinese investments decline.

Donor-supported Approaches to Improving Extractives Governance

Donor interest in the natural resources extractives sector is based upon the premise that it represents an opportunity to improve a country’s development prospects. However, in many cases the presence of extractive resources is associated with poor economic performance. As a result, some donors are trying a radically different approach. This chapter explores one such programme funded by the UK Department for International Development: the Facility for Oil Sector Transparency and Reform in Nigeria. The chapter outlines five lessons learned from this example. First, continual analysis is essential to understand the underlying incentives of key actors. Second, interventions need to be locally led in order to provide legitimacy for reform. Third, interventions need to be flexible and adaptive. Fourth, acceptance of an element of risk is necessary. Fifth, donors need to develop a new way of measuring impact.

Development Assistance

Amongst the key players in combatting corruption are the institutions promoting development assistance, the International Financial Institutions (or Multilateral Development Banks, MDBs) and the bilateral development aid agencies. This chapter questions the effectiveness of development assistance, particularly the autocratic states’ tolerating embezzlement. That discussion also touches on the logic of development assistance and describes donor interest. The chapter then turns to the Oil-for-Food Programme, describing its planned distribution of oil proceeds, and then notes what went wrong, including the topic of the impact of oil surcharges and humanitarian contract kickbacks on the flow of funds. It concludes with a discussion of the contributions of the International Financial Institutions (IFIs) toward improving aid effectiveness.