Search results

How can we conceptualise the politics of aid and account for the effects of internationally-driven poverty reduction policies in the Global South? This Working Paper offers a conceptual framework that goes beyond two common assumptions in the academic literature and the activist milieux: on the one hand, the idea that one-size-fits-all international recommendations and PRSPs are imposed on recipient governments; on the other hand, the idea promoted by the World Bank and shared by most donors that Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) are efficient when "owned" by the recipient government. To do so, the Working Paper takes the case of Mali in the 2000s and presents the uses and trajectories of PRSPs in this West African country. The Working Paper distances itself from the two notions of imposition and "ownership" and takes recipient agency seriously. To investigate the politics of aid and poverty reduction in aid-dependent countries, it offers an analytical framework which borrows from the notion of "appropriation". It argues that the PRSPs in Mali have been successfully appropriated by public actors, i.e. political leaders, public servants and civil society representatives. This Working Paper shows how, over one decade, the PRSP has shifted from being a "World Bank thing", i.e. a mere conditionality to comply with, to being treated by public actors as the "reference framework". This has happened through modalities and processes of appropriation which differed from the scenario initially envisaged by the World Bank but have ensured that the PRSP has become truly Malian, i.e. embedded in the country's socio-political fabric.

ABSTRACTThis article offers a political economy perspective on the Malian crisis with a focus on aid and donor practices. The argument is two-fold. On the one hand, aid consolidated a regime that grew increasingly discredited, so that aid and donors – voluntarily or otherwise – contributed to create the pre-2012 context of fragility. On the other hand, this structural gap has created a state of affairs that provided some impulse and support to putschists and insurgent groups. It explores four channels through which this has happened in practice. External funding agencies have sponsored what was perceived as President Amadou Toumani Touré's 'mismanagement' of the situation in the north and the degradation of governance. In addition, donors exerted weak control over policies and ignored signals of growing popular dissatisfaction with ATT. Finally, when they tried to put pressure on governments, donors chose highly controversial issues and have enacted unpopular conditionalities, which have had destabilising effects.

This practice note offers an account of France's military intervention in Mali launched on 11 January 2013. Firstly, it provides an analysis of the events that led up to the dual crisis in the country's northern and southern regions and to a new wave of armed conflict between government and rebel forces. Then, it is argued that although the French military intervention was framed as inevitable and based on a broad consensus, it will nevertheless be insufficient to address the root sociopolitical causes of Mali´s multidimensional crisis.

Mali is a landlocked country in francophone West Africa that ranked 175th (out of 177) in the United Nations Human Development Index in 2006. Its economy is mostly based on agriculture, and is marked by a high dependence on external assistance. However, the democratization process began in 1991, and the country has recently enjoyed relative social and political stability. Some players on the ground describe Mali as an example of "donor-driven ownership", meaning that there are few signs of genuine policy ownership and leadership in aid relationships, and that the country lacks both "capacity" and "political will" to enable it to reach its development goals. This chapter argues that as aid-donors' influence over policy has increased, the nation's capacity and will to take the lead in managing aid and the aid relationship have decreased. Indeed, if the current political situation seems characterized by a certain degree of inertia, a lack of development strategy, weak capacities and compliance with donors, it can only be understood as the result of the weakening of the state and donor entanglement in national institutions and politics, and several decades of aid dependence. However, negotiations over economic or political reform still occur between the government and donors, sometimes in conflicting terms. These occasions reveal that the Malian government's room to manoeuvre and resources to oppose donor demands do exist, but they are limited. The chapter is divided into three main parts. The first part describes the mechanisms and path of aid-dependence. The second part assesses the impact of the implementation of the "new" aid paradigm on the possibility for recipient ownership. Indeed, the aid system and relationships must be considered in a dynamic manner, as Mali is now the "laboratory" for the implementation of the Paris declaration in West francophone Africa. The last part of the chapter unveils the conditions and potential for recipient ownership and donor support in aid relationships by building on specific policy analysis in the sector of decentralisation and the privatization of cotton.

La « crise » ivoirienne, symbole de la « nouvelle » conflictualité en Afrique, représente un test pour l'Organisation des Nations unies comme pour la France, qui sont étroitement associées dans sa régulation. Responsables de sa qualification de « crise interne », qui a déterminé le type d'intervention mise en place pour y répondre ; d'une partie de sa gestion politique et militaire ; et de sa « fin » supposée, l'organisation mondiale et l'ancienne puissance se trouvent confrontées à leurs contradictions : les appels croissants en faveur de l'intervention internationale se heurtent aux accusations de « néocolonialisme », alors que la France tente non sans difficulté de légitimer son action à travers le multilatéralisme.

Résumé Cet article présente, à partir des recherches, des enquêtes de terrain et de l'expérience professionnelle de ses auteurs, une critique du nouveau paradigme de l'aide publique internationale au développement (également appelé « Agenda de Paris »), fondé principalement sur l'adoption de cadre stratégique de lutte contre la pauvreté, sur l'utilisation de nouvelles modalités (approche sectorielle, aide budgétaire globale) et sur les principes d'appropriation, d'harmonisation et d'alignement. Il souligne les apports, mais aussi les limites au processus de réforme et à l'efficacité de l'aide. Il s'appuie sur l'étude du cas d'un pays africain fortement dépendant de l'aide internationale et impliqué dans la mise en œuvre de la déclaration de Paris : le Mali.