Is Development Assistance Getting Better Due to the Widening Role of Emerging Economies?

  • Neil RenwickEmail author
  • Jing Gu
Part of the Governing China in the 21st Century book series (GC21)


There is a seismic shift emerging in the way that the international development assistance regime is conceived, managed and run. It has two primary causes: Firstly, the weaknesses and limitations of the existing system, as grounded in the hegemonic and exclusionary power and influence of the West. Secondly, the arrival of the “emerging economies” with globalization, which are challenging the structural institutional architecture, central principles and underlying values of the old system, along with its managerial system and effectiveness of delivery. A central and critical aim of these emerging states is the fundamental and irreversible reform of the existing system and, even more radical, a fundamental change in the way international development assistance is understood. The new development assistance (NDA) practiced by these states reflects many influences, the most important of which are their historical experiences as colonized or semi-colonized countries and their long, often bitter paths to independence, reform and renaissance, and their experiences as recipients of international development assistance. Within this shared generic experience, each brings their own distinctive history, understanding and practices of development to NDA. At the center of NDA is the complex relationship between the traditional system and its counter-point, an intricate diachronic process. In this process, the agencies of NDA engage with the principles, structures, processes and practices of the OECD-DAC system. In this respect, NDA is selectively learning from the “traditional” system whilst simultaneously stepping away from it to establish a “new” institutional architecture predicated on distinct principles and practices that deviate from that system.


  1. BBC. (2014). The Mint Countries: Next Economic Giants? BBC News Magazine. Retrieved from
  2. Biron, C. L. (2012, October 19). Brazil Frustrated with European “Backtracking” on IMF Reforms. IPS News. Retrieved from
  3. BRICS Goa. (2016). 8th BRICS Summit: Goa Declaration. Toronto: BRICS Information Centre, University of Toronto. Retrieved from Scholar
  4. BRICS Ufa. (2015). VII BRICS Summit: 2015 Ufa Declaration. Toronto: BRICS Information Centre, University of Toronto. Retrieved from Scholar
  5. BRICS Xiamen. (2017). BRICS Leaders Xiamen Declaration. Toronto: BRICS Information Centre, University of Toronto. Retrieved from Scholar
  6. Gu, J., Shankland, A., & Chenoy, A. (Eds.). (2016). The BRICS in International Development. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Harvey, D. (1991). The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. London: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Harvey, D. (2007). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. International Monetary Fund. (2010). IMF Executive Board Approves Major Overhaul of Quotas and Governance. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. Retrieved from Scholar
  10. International Monetary Fund. (2017). Factsheet: IMF Quotas. Washington, DC: International Monetary Fund. Retrieved from Scholar
  11. Landes, D. S. (1969). The Unbound Prometheus: Technological Change and Industrial Development in Western Europe from 1750 to the Present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Lyotard, J. F. (1979). The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Manchester: University of Manchester Press.Google Scholar
  13. Mawdsley, E. (2012). From Recipients to Donors: Emerging Powers and the Changing Development Landscape. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  14. Mody, A. (2004). What Is an Emerging Market? (WP/04/177). Washington, DC: IMF Research Department. Retrieved from
  15. New Development Bank. (2015). Agreement on the New Development Bank – Fortaleza. Shanghai: New Development Bank. Retrieved from Scholar
  16. OECD. (2011). Busan Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation. Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from Scholar
  17. Quadir, F. (2013). Rising Donors and the New Narrative of ‘South-South’ Cooperation: What Prospects for Changing the Landscape of Development Assistance Programmes? Third World Quarterly, 34(2), 321–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. UN. (1978). Report of the United Nations Conference on Technical Cooperation Among Developing Countries: Buenos Aires 30 August to 12 September 1978 (A/CONF.79/13/Rev.1). New York: UN.Google Scholar
  19. UNDP. (1994). The Buenos Aires Plan of Action. Washington, DC: UNDP, Special Unit for TCDC.Google Scholar
  20. Woetzel, J., Garemo, N., Mischke, J., Hjerpe, M., & Palter, R. (2016). Bridging Global Infrastructure Gaps. New York: McKinsey Institute. Retrieved from Scholar
  21. World Economic Forum. (2013). Strategic Infrastructure: Steps to Prepare and Accelerate Public-Private Partnerships. Geneva: World Economic Forum. Retrieved from Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Humanities & Institute of ConfuciusCoventry UniversityCoventryUK
  2. 2.Institute of Development StudiesUniversity of SussexBrightonUK

Personalised recommendations