Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

This paper discusses the transformation of the DAC and examines its limitations through the comparative analysis with OECD Development Centre. It will elucidate the challenges of the DAC in regaining its role by critically reviewing the concept of “partnership” embedded in development cooperation.

Paper long abstract

While the OECD DAC has coordinated bilateral donors’ aid policies since 1961, global aid architecture has changed over the last few decades. The emergence of the global south (both the providers and the recipients) has endangered the role of the DAC in the global aid architecture. In response, the DAC has transformed its organisational structure by both expanding membership as well as inviting non-DAC actors in different forms. Yet, the image of “rich nations’ club” of the OECD is said to have prevented the emerging countries from being associated with the DAC. At the same time, the DAC norms are changing with the surge of nationalization and politicization of aid in the traditional DAC countries.

Against this backdrop, this paper analyses the transformation of the DAC and its limitations by taking a comparative analysis with the OECD Development Centre. OECD Development Centre has a membership of 56 countries both from emerging countries (including China) and the recipient countries, whereas the DAC’s membership is 34. The paper will discuss how the DAC has expanded both its membership as well as non-DAC actors’ involvement by transforming its organisational structure and then examine its limitations through the lens of “partnership”. By contrasting the modus operandi of the DAC and the Development Centre, it will elucidate the fundamental concept of “partnership” embedded in development cooperation and the challenges faced by the OECD DAC in the global aid architecture. The paper is based on existing literature and the OECD documents as well as interviews.