Can a Country Be a Donor and a Recipient of Aid?

Part of the India Studies in Business and Economics book series (ISBE)


India has now crossed the threshold into Middle Income Status. It is a nuclear power and has a space program. It has announced the formation of an agency to coordinate its aid donor activities. And yet India is the recipient of international aid as well. Can this configuration, on the face of it absurd, nevertheless make sense? This paper explores frameworks in which a Middle Income Country might go on receiving aid despite having crossed a poverty threshold on average. It begins with a discussion of “Global Rawlsianism” and its critics, most prominently Rawls himself, and assesses the moral salience of national level averages in determining global responsibility towards the poor in a country. The next section takes the perspective of Global Utilitarianism and discusses the allocation of global aid with the objective of poverty alleviation, and whether in this context it might make sense for a country to be a donor and a recipient of aid. Finally, the paper takes an operational perspective and discusses some of the key issues facing the international community in the next few years, including the nature of the replenishment of IDA, the World Bank’s concessional assistance window.


Capita Income Moral Responsibility Poverty Line Development Assistance Recipient Country 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Arrow K (1973) Some ordinalist-utilitarian notes on Rawls’s theory of justice. J Philos LXX(9):245–263Google Scholar
  2. Beitz C (1979) Political theory and international relations. Princeton University Press, New JersyGoogle Scholar
  3. Foster J, Greer J, Thorbecke E (1984) A class of decomposable poverty measures. Econometrica 52:761–766Google Scholar
  4. Kanbur R (1987) Measurement and alleviation of poverty: with an application to the impact of macroeconomic adjustment. IMF Staff Papers 60–85Google Scholar
  5. Kanbur R (2005) Reforming the formula: a modest proposal for introducing development outcomes in IDA allocation procedures. Revue d’Economie du Developpement, pp 79–99.
  6. Kanbur R (2012) Aid to middle income countries and the future of IDA. J Int Commerce Econ Policy 3(2):1–9Google Scholar
  7. Kanbur R, Sumner A (2011) Poor countries or poor people? Development assistance and the new geography of global poverty.
  8. Leo B (2010) Inside the World Bank’s black box allocation system: how well does IDA allocate resources to the neediest and most vulnerable countries? Center for Global Development, Working paper no. 216.
  9. Miller R (2010) Globalizing justice. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Moss T, Leo B (2011) IDA at 65: heading toward retirement or a fragile lease on life? Center for Global Development, Working paper 246.
  11. Nagel T (2005) The problem of global justice. Philos Public Aff 33(2):113–147Google Scholar
  12. Pogge T (1989) Realizing Rawls. Cornell University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  14. Rawls J (1999) The law of peoples. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Singer P (2002) One world. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  16. The Economist (2011) India is thinking about setting up its own aid agency. Why should others give aid to India?

Copyright information

© Springer India 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations