• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
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
Program mobile hero image

Program

Democracy, Conflict, and Governance

The Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program is a leading source of independent policy research, writing, and outreach on global democracy, conflict, and governance. It analyzes and seeks to improve international efforts to reduce democratic backsliding, mitigate conflict and violence, overcome political polarization, promote gender equality, and advance pro-democratic uses of new technologies.

Learn More

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

Additional Links

Full Text
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 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Control Above Reform: What’s Behind Ukraine’s Government and Security Reshuffle?

    Ultimately, Zelensky sided neither with the reform camp nor with the military establishment as such, but with political control.

      Balázs Jarábik

  • Trump and MBS walking through a doorway
    Commentary
    Emissary
    What We Know About the U.S.-Saudi Nuclear Deal

    Despite the agreement’s uncertainty, it’s still a significant development in regional and nuclear policy.

      • Andrew Leber
      • Jane Darby Menton

      Andrew Leber, Jane Darby Menton

  • Trump and Xi standing next to each other
    Commentary
    Emissary
    A Path Forward on AI Safety for the United States and China

    “AI safety in parallel” is modest and pragmatic but vital.

      Matt Sheehan

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Why Europe Must Take Charge of its Russia Diplomacy Now

    Trump is distracted and Ukraine wants Europe to step up. The continent’s leaders must find their voice and assert it in talks with Russia.

      Alissa de Carbonnel

  • Supporters of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party wave German flags at a campaign rally in front of the Berlin City Hall on June 29, 2026.
    Paper
    The Alternative für Deutschland and Germany’s Unsettled Place in the World

    Unresolved tensions within the AfD may ultimately constrain the its potential as a leader among European and global populist forces.

      Jeremy Cliffe

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.