GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • Projects
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»Innovative aid instruments and flexible financing: providing better support to fragile states

Innovative aid instruments and flexible financing: providing better support to fragile states

Library
Marcus Manuel, Alastair McKechnie, Maia King, Erin Coppin, Lisa Denney
2012

Summary

This paper presents evidence, analysis and evaluation of the use of aid instruments in fragile states, based on a literature review and questionnaire responses from members of the OECD International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding Working Group on Aid Instruments. It highlights the importance of factors including: a mix of aid instruments (based on context); aid that is speedy, flexible and predictable; longer-term capacity-building; use of government systems; and aligning aid with the budget. It reflects the state of the literature and the international discussion as of June 2011.

Donors use a multiplicity of aid instruments in fragile states, with varying characteristics and levels of success. There are six categories of aid instruments in common use: general budget support; sector budget support; government-managed pooled funds; jointly managed trust funds; project support; and support to and through non-state actors. The following recommendations emerged from the study. They focus in particular on the factors that have been shown to have a determining impact on the success of aid instruments.

  1. Recognise that a mix of instruments is required to deliver better results in fragile states
  2. Make a ‘new deal’ with fragile states: identify a group of fragile states where the risks of the return to conflict are so high and the needs for rapid development are so great that a set of standard changes or exemptions to normal aid regulations/practices should be applied
  3. Increase speed and flexibility of aid in fragile states
  4. Recognise the g7+ has both a clear preference for more aid through government systems and a clear willingness to accept more safeguards to manage the risks involved
  5. Align all support in fragile states – including project aid, humanitarian aid and security support – to the country’s budget and ensure all support prioritises peacebuilding and statebuilding objectives
  6. Provide more predictable, sustained financing in fragile states
  7. Ensure aid delivery also supports development of long-term capacity
  8. Strengthen transparency, results, accountability and value for money in fragile states.

Source

Manuel, M., McKechnie, A., King, M., Coppin, E., & Denney, L. (2012). Innovative aid instruments and flexible financing: providing better support to fragile states. ODI.

Related Content

Doing research in fragile contexts
Literature Review
2019
Social Safety Nets in Fragile and Conflict-Affected States
Helpdesk Report
2019
Cost-Effectiveness in Humanitarian Aid: Localisation Programming
Helpdesk Report
2018
Cost-Effectiveness in Humanitarian Work: the Promotion of International Humanitarian Law
Helpdesk Report
2018

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2026; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2026; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2026

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".