• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
Revitalizing Democracy Assistance: The Challenge of USAID
Report

Revitalizing Democracy Assistance: The Challenge of USAID

USAID—the largest source of U.S. democracy assistance—requires deep-reaching reforms if the Obama administration hopes to adequately address challenges to democracy around the world.

Link Copied
By Thomas Carothers
Published on Oct 27, 2009

Additional Links

Full TextSummary

Democracy is largely stagnant in the world and a growing number of governments exhibit hostility toward international democracy aid. Faced with this daunting context, President Obama and his foreign policy team have so far moved only cautiously to formulate an approach to democracy promotion. Tackling longstanding problems with the basic structures of U.S. democracy aid would boost this effort. As the largest source of such assistance, USAID is an obvious starting point for deep-reaching reforms.

Key Conclusions

  • With the Obama administration having launched major reviews of development policy, a critical juncture exists for substantial reforms of USAID and other key actors in U.S. democracy assistance, a domain that now consists of $2.5 billion a year of aid programs in more than 80 countries.
     
  • Although USAID has a long record of positive contributions to numerous democratic transitions, its accumulated institutional woes lead to democracy aid efforts that fall short due to lack of flexibility, stifled innovation, and lack of institutional commitment.
     
  • Fixing USAID’s shortcomings will require determined, focused leadership at USAID, with active support from Congress and the Obama administration. As Congress and the administration take up the larger overhaul of U.S. development policy generally, they should not neglect the domain of democracy and governance support. 


Recommendations

  • Fight bureaucratization: The crushing bureaucratization of USAID’s democracy and governance work must be reversed through a comprehensive series of reforms that simplify the procurement process, eliminate duplicative layers of oversight, reduce reporting requirements, and improve the evaluation process.
     
  • Bolster local ownership: USAID should build more flexible funding arrangements with its implementing partners that encourage genuine partnerships with local groups and increase direct funding to local organizations. 
     
  • Strengthen the place of democracy and governance work within USAID: Ensure that democracy and governance is fully supported as an institutional priority and is well-integrated into other areas of foreign assistance, through clear leadership commitment at the top and numerous steps at other levels, such as strengthening the Office of Democracy and Governance and following through on new training commitments. 


“A successful revitalization of USAID’s democracy and governance work would be a telling signal that the Obama administration is forging significant institutional changes that will help the United States meet the serious challenges that democracy’s uncertain global fortunes now pose.”

About the Author

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.

    Recent Work

  • Article
    How Anger Over Corruption Keeps Driving Global Politics
      • McKenzie Carrier

      Thomas Carothers, McKenzie Carrier

  • Commentary
    When Do Mass Protests Topple Autocrats?
      • McKenzie Carrier

      Thomas Carothers, McKenzie Carrier

Thomas Carothers
Harvey V. Fineberg Chair for Democracy Studies; Director, Democracy, Conflict, and Governance Program
Thomas Carothers
North AmericaUnited StatesPolitical ReformDemocracyForeign 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 Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    The Rada Reawakens: Ukraine’s Messy Politics Returns

    The return of parliamentary politics reflects a broader shift from earlier expectations of a settlement and elections toward the reality of a prolonged war.

      Balázs Jarábik

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Who Is Responsible for the Demise of the Russian Internet?

    The Russian state has opted for complete ideological control of the internet and is prepared to bear the associated costs.

      Maria Kolomychenko

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Is Opposition to Online Restrictions an Inflection Point for the Russian Regime?

    After four years of war, there is no one who can stand up to the security establishment, and President Vladimir Putin is increasingly passive. 

      Tatiana Stanovaya

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What’s Having More Impact on Russian Oil Export Revenues: Ukrainian Strikes or Rising Prices?

    Although Ukrainian strikes have led to a noticeable decline in the physical volume of Russian oil exports, the rise in prices has more than made up for it.

      • Sergey Vakulenko

      Sergey Vakulenko

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Russia Is Meddling for Meddling’s Sake in the Middle East

    The Russian leadership wants to avoid a dangerous precedent in which it is squeezed out of Iran by the United States and Israel—and left powerless to respond in any meaningful way.

      Nikita Smagin

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.