For Some, A Declaration is Worth an Additional Dollar: How Foreign Aid Agencies Responded to the Millennium Development Goals

Abstract

In 2000, the UN and 189 member countries made an unprecedented commitment to global development with the Millennium Declaration, which turned into the Millennium Development Goals in 2001. The MDGs were eight goals associated with concrete targets and indicators meant to set the stage to start the 21st century with rapid improvement for the world’s poorest populations. Targeted foreign aid was one of the many ways that world leaders expected to achieve these goals, but there is a question of whether aid actually went to MDG causes in response to the agreement. This thesis examines whether foreign aid agencies changed their aid allocation to be more in line with the targets outlined in the MDGs, which were in effect from 2001 to 2015. It argues that foreign aid and the MDGs are inextricably linked, regardless of whether foreign aid is the most effective solution to issues of global development. Through quantitative analysis I prove that in the period from 1995 to 2005 there was a clear focus on MDG causes, but I do not find a structural break in the data indicating a specific moment when aid agencies started implementing changes in favor of the goals. I further find that specific goals were prioritized more than others, depending on how controversial they were in the drafting process. I find that bilateral and multilateral agencies behave differently. Finally, through quantitative analysis and qualitative case studies, I find that bilateral agencies have differing levels of support for the goals depending on their linkage with multilateral agencies, government operations and structure, public support for aid and development, and political climate within their country. I conclude with a brief discussion of how my analysis can inform the creation of future international agreements, like the Sustainable Development Goals, which replaced the MDGs in 2015.