In the 2000s a new aid regime evolved. This promised to move beyond the former neoliberal approach in a number of ways. It would involve greater consultation between donors and recipients, shift the focus from economic growth to broader factors, including poverty, and hand back the responsibility for this to the nation-state. This approach bears strong resemblance to the rise of neostructuralism, a development paradigm that has become highly influential in Latin America. In this article we trace the shifts in the aid regime and ask to what extent the contemporary regime can be defined a postneoliberal paradigm.
Action Aid. 2008: Making aid accountable and effective. Action Aid, Johannesburg.
2.
Barton, J.R. and Murray, W.E.2002: The end of transition? Chile 1990–2000. Bulletin of Latin American Research21, 329–38.
3.
Brohman, J.1996: Popular development: Rethinking the theory and practice of development. Blackwell Publishers.
4.
Buchanan, P.2008: Prospects and problems of indigenous socialism in Latin America. In Murray, W.E. and Rabel, R., editors, Latin America today: Challenges, opportunities and trans-Pacific perspectives. New Zealand Institute of International Affairs, 57–70.
5.
Buiter, W.H.2007: Country ownership: A term whose time has gone. Development in Practice17, 647–52.
6.
Cooke, B. and Kothari, U.2001: The case for participation: The new tyranny? In Cooke, B. and Kothari, U., editors, Participation: The new tyranny?Zed Books, 1–23.
7.
Cornwall, A.2007: Buzzwords and fuzzwords: Deconstructing development discourse. Development in Practice17, 471–84.
8.
Craig, D. and Porter, D.2003: Poverty reduction strategy papers: A new convergence. World Development31, 53–69.
9.
Craig, D.2006: Development beyond neoliberalism? Governance, poverty reduction and political economy. Routledge.
10.
Cramer, C., Stein, H. and Weeks, J.2006: Ownership and donorship: Analytical issues and a Tanzanian case study. Journal of Contemporary African Studies24, 415–36.
11.
de Haan, A.2009: How the aid industry works: An introduction to international development. Kumarian Press.
12.
ECLAC. 1990: Changing production patterns with social equity. Santiago, ECLAC.
13.
Eurodad. 2008: Outcome-based conditionality: Too good to be true? Brussels, European Network on Debt and Development (Eurodad).
14.
Eyben, R.2007: Harmonisation: How is the orchestra conducted?Development in Practice17, 640–46.
15.
Fine, B.1997: The developmental state is dead: Long live social capital?Development and Change30, 1–19.
16.
Gould, J.2005: The new conditionality: The politics of poverty reduction strategies. Zed Books.
17.
Gwynne, R.N. and Kay, C.2000: Views from the periphery: Futures of neoliberalism in Latin America. Third World Quarterly21, 141–56.
18.
Gwynne, R.N.2004: Latin America transformed: Globalization and modernity. Arnold Publication.
19.
Hickey, S. and Mohan, G.2004: Towards participation as transformation: Critical themes and challenges. In Hickey, S. and Mohan, G., editors, Participation: From tyranny to transformation?Zed Books, 3–24.
20.
Hojman, D.1997: El Mercurio’s editorial page (‘La Semana Economica’) and neoliberal policy making in today’s Chile. In Fowler, W., editor, Ideologues and ideologies in Latin America. Greenwood, 171–85.
21.
Howell, J. and Lind, J.2008: Changing donor policy and practice in civil society in the post-9/11 aid context. Third World Quarterly30, 1279–96.
22.
Hyden, G.2008: After the Paris Declaration: Taking on the issue of power. Development Policy Review26, 259–74.
23.
Ishkanian, A.2006: From inclusion to exclusion: Armenian NGOs’ participation in the PRSP. Journal of International Development18, 729–40.
24.
Kay, C.1989: Latin American theories of development and underdevelopment. Routledge.
25.
Kay, C.1997: Latin America’s exclusionary rural development in a neoliberal world. Paper presented at the 1997 meeting of the Latin American Studies Association (LASA), Continental Plaza Hotel, Guadalajara, Mexico, 17–19 April.
26.
Kennedy, C. and Murray, W.E.2008: Running to stand still – Inequality in Chile 1968–2008. Paper presented at International Geographic Union Economic Geography Commission Conference, Barcelona, 21–24 August.
27.
Killick, T.2005: The politics of Ghana’s budgetary system, CDD/ODI Policy Brief No. 2, CDD-Ghana.
28.
Koeberle, S. and Stavreski, Z.2006: Budget support: Concepts and issues. In Koeberle, S., Stavreski, Z. and Walliser, J., editors, Budget support as more effective aid. World Bank, 3–27.
29.
Leiva, F.2008: Toward a critique of Latin American neostructuralism. Latin American Politics and Society50, 1–25.
30.
Murray, W.E.2006: Geographies of globalization. Routledge.
31.
Murray, W.E. and Pastor, R.2008: Growth with equity? Neostructuralism in Chile. In Murray, W.E. and Rabel, R., editors, Latin America today: Challenges, opportunities and trans-Pacific perspectives. New Zealand Institute of International Affairs/Victoria Institute for Links with Latin America.
32.
Murray, W.E. and Rabel, R.2008: Latin America today: Challenges, opportunities and trans-Pacific perspectives. New Zealand Institute of International Affairs/Victoria Institute for Links with Latin America.
33.
Ocampo, J.1993: Terms of trade and center-periphery relations. In Sunkel, O., editor, Development from within: Toward a neostructuralist approach for Latin America. Lynne Rienner Publishers, 333–60.
34.
OECD. 2008: Accra agenda for action. OECD.
35.
Prebisch, R.1949: Introduction: The economic development of Latin America and its principal problems. Economic Survey of Latin America 1948. ECLAC.
36.
Prebisch, R.1959: Commercial policy in under-developed countries. American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings492, 251–73.
37.
Saith, A.2006: From universal values to Millennium Development Goals: Lost in translation?Development and Change37, 1167–99.
38.
Silva, E.1997: The politics of sustainable development: Native forest policy in Chile, Venezuela, Costa Rica and Mexico. Journal of Latin American Studies29, 457–93.
39.
Smith, H.2005: Ownership and capacity: Do current donor approaches help or hinder the achievement of international and national targets for education?International Journal of Educational Development25, 445–55.
40.
Stiglitz, J.E.1998: More instruments and broader goals: Moving toward the post Washington Consensus. The 1998 WIDER Annual Lecture, Helsinki, 7 January. Global Policy Forum, http:///www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/209/4325.html, last accessed on 18 June 2010.
41.
Stiglitz, J.E.2005: The post Washington Consensus consensus. Presentation, Sao Paulo, 22 August 2005, http:///www.who.int/trade/glossary/story074/en/index.html, last accessed on 18 June 2010.
42.
Storey, D., Bulloch, H. and Overton, J.2005: The poverty consensus: Some limitations of the ‘popular agenda’. Progress in Development Studies5, 30–44.
43.
Sunkel, O.1990: The environmental dimension in development planning. ECLAC.
44.
van Reesch, E.2006: Ten years into the sector-wide approach: Did we do what we intended to do? In A Rich Menu for the Poor: Food for Thought on Effective Aid Politics. Ministry of Foreign Affairs (DEK).
45.
Wallace, T., Bornstein, L. and Chapman, J.2007: The aid chain: Coercion and commitment in development NGOs. Intermediate Technology Publications/Practical Action Publications.
46.
Wohlgemuth, L.2006: Changing aid modalities in Tanzania (Policy Management Brief 17), ECDPM Policy Management Briefs. ECPDM.
