ArticleBMJ global health2024
Shifting official development assistance during COVID-19: earmarking, donor concentration and loans.
Article in BMJ global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextIn contrast to bilateral aid, aid disbursed from multilateral institutions increased significantly at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, at a time when a coherent and effective multilateral response is needed most, the COVID-19 pandemic revealed a shifting landscape of donor agencies that struggle with basic functions, such as cross-national coordination. While multilaterals are uniquely positioned to transcend national priorities and respond to pandemics, functionally we find official development assistance (ODA) from these entities may increasingly mimic the attributes of bilateral aid. We explore three important, but not comprehensive, attributes of aid leading up to and during the COVID-19 pandemic: (1) earmarking, (2) donor concentration and (3) aid modality.
methodsWe examine ODA disbursements over time in 2020 constant prices from 2010 to 2021 and plot share of inflow that is earmarked against each United Nations multilateral against their average annual financing volume. We then assess market diversity with two measures: the Shannon-Weiner Function and Gini-Simpson Index. Finally, we examine financing vehicles used to disburse and look at 'grant share' of total ODA from all formal donors over time.
findingsWe find that while the absolute number of formal multilateral actors and market diversity have been increasing since 2011, there has been a concurrent market consolidation led by the World Bank Group at 37% of market share in 2021. This coincides with an increasing prevalence of earmarking of aid inflows to the multilateral system and, unique to multilaterals but concerning given increasing debt risk, a rise in loan-based ODA disbursements.
conclusionsIn theory, this consolidation may streamline revenue pooling and allow for a more collective approach to mitigating pandemic risk but, paired with increased earmarking, has the potential to sideline both collective goals (eg, the Sustainable Development Goals) and counties' core mandates (such as the pursuit of universal health coverage).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.