Armed Conflict, Terrorism, and the Allocation of Foreign Aid

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Armed conflict and terrorism have damaging impacts on economic development through disruption of economic activity and trade and the destruction of resources, both human and capital. They can also have another indirect effect through their impact on aid, but the likely net effect is not obvious. The impact on the economy and polity may well discourage aid donors and lead to a reduction in aid. On the other hand donors may provide aid as a reimbursement for counter-terrorist efforts that benefit the donor country. This paper tries to identify the net effect using a panel of countries. It finds that armed conflict does have a large and negative effect on both multilateral and bilateral aid, but that bilateral donors also seem to turn a blind eye to violence in oil exporting countries. It also finds that while international terrorism tends to increase bilateral aid, bilateral donors seem indifferent to domestic terrorism. In contrast, multilateral aid is found not to react to international terrorism, but does react to its domestic terrorism.
Original languageEnglish
JournalEconomics of Peace and Security Journal
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013

Fingerprint

terrorism
exporting country
human resources
economics
violence
economy

Keywords

  • terrorism
  • armed conflict
  • development aid

Cite this

Armed Conflict, Terrorism, and the Allocation of Foreign Aid. / Lis, Piotr.

In: Economics of Peace and Security Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1, 2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{99a0c5c22bd745b08b4a20b69607350c,
title = "Armed Conflict, Terrorism, and the Allocation of Foreign Aid",
abstract = "Armed conflict and terrorism have damaging impacts on economic development through disruption of economic activity and trade and the destruction of resources, both human and capital. They can also have another indirect effect through their impact on aid, but the likely net effect is not obvious. The impact on the economy and polity may well discourage aid donors and lead to a reduction in aid. On the other hand donors may provide aid as a reimbursement for counter-terrorist efforts that benefit the donor country. This paper tries to identify the net effect using a panel of countries. It finds that armed conflict does have a large and negative effect on both multilateral and bilateral aid, but that bilateral donors also seem to turn a blind eye to violence in oil exporting countries. It also finds that while international terrorism tends to increase bilateral aid, bilateral donors seem indifferent to domestic terrorism. In contrast, multilateral aid is found not to react to international terrorism, but does react to its domestic terrorism.",
keywords = "terrorism, armed conflict, development aid",
author = "Piotr Lis",
year = "2013",
doi = "10.15355/epsj.8.1.12",
language = "English",
volume = "8",
journal = "Economics of Peace and Security Journal",
issn = "1749-852X",
publisher = "Economists for Peace and Security",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Armed Conflict, Terrorism, and the Allocation of Foreign Aid

AU - Lis, Piotr

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Armed conflict and terrorism have damaging impacts on economic development through disruption of economic activity and trade and the destruction of resources, both human and capital. They can also have another indirect effect through their impact on aid, but the likely net effect is not obvious. The impact on the economy and polity may well discourage aid donors and lead to a reduction in aid. On the other hand donors may provide aid as a reimbursement for counter-terrorist efforts that benefit the donor country. This paper tries to identify the net effect using a panel of countries. It finds that armed conflict does have a large and negative effect on both multilateral and bilateral aid, but that bilateral donors also seem to turn a blind eye to violence in oil exporting countries. It also finds that while international terrorism tends to increase bilateral aid, bilateral donors seem indifferent to domestic terrorism. In contrast, multilateral aid is found not to react to international terrorism, but does react to its domestic terrorism.

AB - Armed conflict and terrorism have damaging impacts on economic development through disruption of economic activity and trade and the destruction of resources, both human and capital. They can also have another indirect effect through their impact on aid, but the likely net effect is not obvious. The impact on the economy and polity may well discourage aid donors and lead to a reduction in aid. On the other hand donors may provide aid as a reimbursement for counter-terrorist efforts that benefit the donor country. This paper tries to identify the net effect using a panel of countries. It finds that armed conflict does have a large and negative effect on both multilateral and bilateral aid, but that bilateral donors also seem to turn a blind eye to violence in oil exporting countries. It also finds that while international terrorism tends to increase bilateral aid, bilateral donors seem indifferent to domestic terrorism. In contrast, multilateral aid is found not to react to international terrorism, but does react to its domestic terrorism.

KW - terrorism

KW - armed conflict

KW - development aid

U2 - 10.15355/epsj.8.1.12

DO - 10.15355/epsj.8.1.12

M3 - Article

VL - 8

JO - Economics of Peace and Security Journal

JF - Economics of Peace and Security Journal

SN - 1749-852X

IS - 1

ER -