바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

Effect of ODA on the Donor’s Economy: Localization and Technological Innovation Efforts of Recipient Country and the Sectoral Differentials of Effects

Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy / Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy, (P)2287-1608; (E)2287-1616
2015, v.4 no.1, pp.1-18
https://doi.org/10.7545/ajip.2015.4.1.001
Jun-Mo Kim
Kwon, Hyuk-Dong
Young Kwan Kwon

Abstract

Most research on Official Development Assistance (ODA) targeted the recipients, but this study examines the effect of ODA on the donor’s exports to the recipient. To do this, a panel analysis was carried out with ODA and macroeconomic data on the United States and 33 other countries from 1999 to 2009. The results are summarized as follows: (1) The economic influence on the donor varies with the recipient’s localization effort. (2) High-tech exports to the recipient are independent of ODA. (3) In medium-to-low-technology areas, ODA has a positive effect on exports to the recipient with low absorption efforts. (4) Both High-tech and LM-tech product exports decreases with the technological innovation efforts of recipients with high absorption efforts, while High-tech product exports only increases with that of recipients with low absorption efforts. These results indicate that a strategic approach for ODA program is more effective and useful to the donor’s economy.

keywords
Donor, official development assistance, economic growth, localization effort, national innovation system

Reference

1.

Aitken, B.J. and Harrison, A.E. (1999) Do domestic firms benefit from direct investment? Evidence from Venezuela, American Economic Review, 89(3), 605-618.

2.

Amsden, A.H. and Chu, W. (2003) Beyond Late Development: Taiwan's Upgrading Policies, The MIT press.

3.

Arvin, B.M. and Baum, C.F. (1997) Tied and untied foreign aid: a theoretical and empirical analysis, Keio Economic Studies, 34, 71-79.

4.

Arvin, M., Piretti, A. and Lew, B. (2003) Foreign aid and export expansion: testing for causality and cointegration, Rivista Internatzionale Di Scienze Sociali, 111, 459-492.

5.

Beck, N. and Katz, J.N. (1996) Nuisance vs. substance: specifying and estimating time-series-cross-section models, Political analysis, 6(1), 1-36.

6.

Bender, G. and Laestadius, S. (2005) Non-science based innovativeness on capabilities relevant to generate profitable novelty, Journal of Mental Changes, 11(1-2), 123-170.

7.

Berthelemy, J.C. (2006) Bilateral donors' interest vs. recipients' development motives in aid allocation: do all donors behave the same? Review of Development Economics, 10(2), 179-194

8.

Burnside, C. and Dollar, D. (2000) Aid, policies, and growth, American Economic Review, 90(4), 847-868.

9.

Chandran-Govindaraju, V.G.R. and Wong, C.Y. (2011) Patenting activities by developing countries: the case of Malaysia, World Patent Information, 33(1), 51-57.

10.

Clark, D.P. (1991) Trade versus aid: distributions of third world development assistance, Economic Development and Cultural Change, 39(4), 829-837.

11.

Clay, E.J., Geddes, M. and Natali, L. (2009) Untying Aid: Is it working? An Evaluation of the Implementation of the Paris Declaration and of the 2001 DAC Recommendation of Untying ODA to the LDCs, Copenhagen: Danish Institute for International Studies, www.oecd.org/dataoecd/51/35/44375975.pdf.

12.

Coccia, M. (2010) Democratization is the driving force for technological and economic change, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(2), 248-264.

13.

Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D.A. (1990) Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation, Administrative Science Quarterly, 128-152.

14.

Collier, P. and Dollar, D. (2004) Development effectiveness: what have we learnt? The Economic Journal, 114(496), 244-271.

15.

Dai, Y. and Jin, W. (2011) The upgrading of local industrial cluster embedded in global value chain, Information Management, Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering (ICIII), 2011 International Conference, 3, 458-461.

16.

Fitzpatrick, J. and Storey, A. (1988) Economic benefits to Ireland of official development assistance, Trocaire Development Review, 51-68.

17.

Fu, X., Pietrobelli, C. and Soete, L. (2010) The role of foreign technology and indigenous innovation in the emerging economies: technological change and catching-up, World Development, 39(7), 1204-1212.

18.

Guillamont, P. and Chauvet, L. (2001) Aid and performance: a reassessment, Journal of Development Studies, 37(6), 66-92.

19.

Haaparanta, P. and Virta, H. (2007) Do aid and debt help the poor countries to catch up in technology? Helsinki Center of Economic Research, Discussion Paper, 183, 1-25.

20.

Hansen, H. and Tarp, F. (2001) Aid and growth regressions, Journal of Development Economics, 64(2), 547-570.

21.

Hopkin, A. (1970) Aid and the balance of payments, Economic Journal, 80(370), 1-23.

22.

Hu A.G.Z. and Jefferson, G.H. (2002) FDI impact and spillover: evidence from China's electronic and textile industries, World Economy, 25, 1063-1076.

23.

Hyson, C.D. and Stout, A.M. (1968) Impact of foreign aid on U.S. exports, Harvard Business Review, 63-71

24.

Intarakumnerd, P. (2011) Two models of research technology organisations in Asia, Science Technology and Society, 16(1), 11-28.

25.

Intarakumnerd, P., Chairatana, P. and Tangchitpiboon, T. (2002) National innovation system in less successful developing countries: the case of Thailand, Research Policy, 31, 1445-1457.

26.

Islam, M.N. (2003) Political regimes and the effects of foreign aid on economic growth, Journal of Developing Areas, 37(1), 35-53.

27.

Jepma, C.J. (1991) The tying of aid, OECD, Paris: France.

28.

Johansson, L.M. and Pettersson, J. (2009) Tied aid, trade-facilitating aid or trade-diverting aid? University of Upsala ,Working Paper 5.

29.

Johnson, B., Ediquist, C. and Lundvall, B. (2003) Economic Development and the National System of Innovation Approach, Georgia Institute of Technology.

30.

Johansson, L., Nannyonjo, J., Pettersson, J. and Stavlota, U. (2006) Uganda: Aid and trade, Case study for the OECD, Policy Dialogue on Aid for Trade, 6-7.

31.

Laestadius, S., Pedersen, T. and Sandven, T. (2005) Towards a new understanding of innovativeness and of innovation based indicators, Journal of Mental Changes, 11(1/2), 75-122.

32.

Lee, K. and Lim, C. (2001) Technological regimes, catching-up and leapfrogging: findings from the Korean industries, Research policy, 30(3), 459-483.

33.

Lloyd, T., Morrissey, O. and Osei, R. (2001) Problems with Pooling in Panel Data Analysis for Developing Countries: The Case of Aid and Trade Relationships, University of Nottingham, CREDIT Research Paper 01/14.

34.

Nowak-Lehmann, D.F., Martinez-Zarzoso, I. and Klasen, S. (2008) Ibero-America institute of economic research discussion paper, Aid and Trade-A Donor’s Perspective, 171.

35.

Martinez-Zarzoso, I., Klasen, S., Nowak-Lehmann, F.D. and Larch, M. (2009) Does German development aid promote German exports? German Economic Review, 10(3), 317-338.

36.

Mazzoleni, R. and Nelson, R.R. (2007) Public research institutions and economic catch-up, Research Policy, 36(10), 1512-1528.

37.

Metcalfe, S. (1988) The diffusion of innovation: an interpretative survey, In: Dosi, G. et al. (eds.), Technical Change and Economic Theory, Frances Pinter, London, 560-589.

38.

Mori, J., Nguyen, T.X.T. and Pham, T.H. (2009) Skill development for Vietnam's industrialization, Hiroshima University's COE project, 1-38.

39.

Nilsson, L. (1997) Aid and Donor Exports: The Case of the EU Countries, In Nilsson, L. (ed.) Essays on North-South Trade, Lund: Lund Economic Studies, N.70.

40.

Osei, R., Morrissey, O. and Lloyd, T. (2004) The nature of aid and trade relationships, European Journal of Development Research, 16(2), 354-374.

41.

Oyelaran-Oyeyinka, B. (2006) Systems of innovation and underdevelopment: an institutional perspective, Science Technology and Society, 11(2), 239-269.

42.

Radelet, S. (2006) A Primer on Foreign Aid Center for Global Development, Working Paper No.92.

43.

Santamaria, L., Nieto, M. and Barge-Gil, A. (2008) Beyond formal R&D: taking advantage of other sources of innovation in low- and medium technology industries, Research Policy, 38, 507-517.

44.

Tajoli, L. (1999) The impact of tied aid on trade flows between donor and recipient, Journal of International Trade and Economic Development, 373-388.

45.

Toye, J. and Clark, J. (1986) The aid and trade provision: origins, dimensions and possible reforms, Development Policy Review, 4, 291-313.

46.

Tu, Y. and Tan, X. (2011) Technology spillovers of FDI in ASEAN sourcing from local and abroad, M&D Forum 2011, 110-121.

47.

Vogler-Ludwig, K. (2002) The German Policy Approach to Combat Precarious Employment, ESOPE.

48.

Vogler-Ludwig, K., Schönherr, K., Taube, M. and Blau, H. (1999) Die Auswirkungen der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit auf den Wirtschaftsstandort Deutschland, Weltforum Verlag.

49.

Wagner, D. (2003) Aid and trade-an empirical study, Journal of the Japanese and International Economics, 17, 153-173.

50.

Wang, E.C. and Huang, W. (2007) Relative efficiency of R&D activities: a cross-country study accounting for environmental factors in the DEA approach, Research Policy, 36(2), 260-273.

51.

Zarine-Nejadan, M., Monteiro, J. and Noormamode, S. (2008) The Impact of Official Development Assistance on Donor Country Exports: Some Empirical Evidence for Switzerland, Institute for Research in Economics, 1-156.

52.

Zhu, S., Yamano, N. and Cimper, A. (2011) Compilation of bilateral trade database by industry and end-use category, technology and industry working papers, OECD Science, OECD Publishing, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k9h6vx2z07f-en.

Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy