• Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Middle East logoCarnegie lettermark logo
LebanonIran
Aiding Governance in Developing Countries: Progress Amid Uncertainties

Source: Getty

Paper

Aiding Governance in Developing Countries: Progress Amid Uncertainties

International aid donors have learned important lessons about how to provide effective governance assistance to developing countries, but turning these insights into practice remains a major challenge.

Link Copied
By Thomas Carothers and Diane de Gramont
Published on Nov 29, 2011

Additional Links

Full Text

Since emerging as a new donor enthusiasm in the 1990s, governance support has become a major area of aid to developing countries. The idea that remedying debilitating patterns of inefficient, corrupt, and unaccountable governance will unlock developmental progress appeals not just to aid providers but also to ordinary people throughout the developing world who are angry at unresponsive and poorly functioning states. Yet despite the natural appeal of improving governance, it has proved challenging in practice. Many initial assumptions about the task have run aground on the shoals of countervailing realities. As a result, aid practitioners have begun accumulating important insights about how to improve governance aid:

  • Governance deficiencies are often primarily political and cannot be resolved through technical assistance alone.
     
  • Fostering citizen demand for better governance is as important as topdown efforts aimed at improving the “supply” of governance.
     
  • Governance aid may be more effective at the local level than at the national level.
     
  • Despite the intuitive appeal of governance best practices, concentrating on locally determined “best fit” may be more productive.
     
  • Informal institutions are a central part of the governance puzzle and cannot be treated as developmental marginalia.
     
  • Governance concerns should be integrated into the full range of assistance programming.
     
  • Donor countries should address international drivers of poor governance.
     
  • Aiding governance effectively requires development agencies to rethink their own internal governance.

These eight insights represent the framework of an emergent but still tentative second generation of governance support. Often embraced in principle, they are still far from being widely implemented in practice.

Even as governance assistance progresses, it struggles with several continuing uncertainties. The empirical case that improved governance is necessary for development progress is less straightforward than many aid practitioners would wish. The increasing pressure faced by most aid organizations for rapid, clearly measurable results sometimes works against sophisticated governance assistance. Larger international aid trends, especially the rise of new donors with other priorities, threaten to weaken the governance agenda.

Fully operationalizing these insights and overcoming the uncertainties will be hard. But the central promise of governance assistance—finally getting to the heart of the development challenge—is great enough to justify the effort and to ensure that even partial success will be worthwhile.

About the Authors

Thomas Carothers

Harvey V. Fineberg Chair for Democracy Studies; Director, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program

Thomas Carothers, director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program, is a leading expert on comparative democratization and international support for democracy.

Diane de Gramont

Former Nonresident Research Analyst, Democracy and Rule of Law Program

Diane de Gramont was a nonresident research analyst in Carnegie’s Democracy and Rule of Law Program.

Authors

Thomas Carothers
Harvey V. Fineberg Chair for Democracy Studies; Director, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
Thomas Carothers
Diane de Gramont
Former Nonresident Research Analyst, Democracy and Rule of Law Program
North AmericaUnited StatesEuropePolitical ReformDemocracyEconomyForeign Policy

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    The United States and Iran Have Agreed to a Two-Week Ceasefire

    Spot analysis from Carnegie scholars on events relating to the Middle East and North Africa.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Iran Rewrites Its War Strategy

    In an interview, Hamidreza Azizi discusses how Tehran has adapted in real time to the conflict with the United States and Israel.

      Michael Young

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Trump’s Plan for Gaza Is Not Irrelevant. It’s Worse.

    The simple conclusion is that the scheme will bring neither peace nor prosperity, but will institutionalize devastation.

      Nathan J. Brown

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    What Does the Strait of Hormuz’s Closure Mean?

    In an interview, Roger Diwan discusses where the global economy may be going in the third week of the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran.

      Nur Arafeh

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Tehran’s Easy Targets

    In an interview, Andrew Leber discusses the impact the U.S. and Israeli war against Iran is having on Arab Gulf states.

      Michael Young

Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
Carnegie Middle East logo, white
  • Research
  • Diwan
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.