WEKO3
アイテム
How do “Emerging” Donors Differ from “Traditional” Donors?
https://doi.org/10.18884/00000602
https://doi.org/10.18884/00000602b0ccdbf9-ed62-46b3-89fd-04da76843a8c
| 名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
|---|---|---|
JICA-RI_WP_No.2_2010.pdf (1.2 MB)
|
.png)
|
| Item type | 報告書 / Research Paper(1) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 2010-03-01 | |||||
| タイトル | ||||||
| タイトル | How do “Emerging” Donors Differ from “Traditional” Donors? | |||||
| 言語 | ||||||
| 言語 | eng | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | emerging donors | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | Cambodia | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | harmonization | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | aid fragmentation | |||||
| キーワード | ||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||
| 主題 | institution | |||||
| 資源タイプ | ||||||
| 資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18ws | |||||
| 資源タイプ | research report | |||||
| ID登録 | ||||||
| ID登録 | 10.18884/00000602 | |||||
| ID登録タイプ | JaLC | |||||
| その他（別言語等）のタイトル | ||||||
| その他のタイトル | An Institutional Analysis of Foreign Aid in Cambodia | |||||
| 報告年度 | ||||||
| 日付 | 2010-03-01 | |||||
| 日付タイプ | Issued | |||||
| 著者 |
Sato, Jin
× Sato, Jin× Shiga, Hiroaki× Kobayashi, Takaaki× Kondoh, Hisahiro |
|||||
| 抄録 | ||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||
| 内容記述 | Debate about the role and impact of the so-called “emerging donors” is becoming increasingly heated. The common reaction to these new donors, distinct from that accorded traditional donors, has had the unfortunate effect of obscuring two important aspects of the evolving aid landscape: 1) commonalities between the emerging donors and traditional Development Assistance Committee (DAC) donors; and 2) an evident diversity among the emerging donors. The biases at play are derived not only from a lack of sufficient information about how these new donors operate on the ground, but also from a lack of effort to integrate and analyze information that is available. This paper examines the impact of four emerging donors — China, India, the Republic of Korea (hereinafter referred to as “Korea”), and Thailand — on Cambodia‟s development, with a specific focus on the processes of aid provision by these new donors. By accounting for the experiences of the recipient country, this paper also challenges the conventional view that aid fragmentation should be reduced a priori. | |||||
| 号 | ||||||
| 号 | Working Paper;2 | |||||
