Publicação: Why is ‘The Dutch disease’ always a disease? the macroeconomic consequences of scaling up ODA
Carregando...
Paginação
Primeira página
Última página
Data
Data de publicação
Data da Série
Data do evento
Data
Data de defesa
Data
Edição
Idioma
eng
Cobertura espacial
Cobertura temporal
País
Brasil
organization.page.location.country
Tipo de evento
Tipo
Grau Acadêmico
Fonte original
ISBN
ISSN
DOI
dARK
item.page.project.ID
item.page.project.productID
Detentor dos direitos autorais
International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth
United Nations Development Programme
United Nations Development Programme
Acesso à informação
Acesso Aberto
Termos de uso
O texto e dados desta publicação podem ser reproduzidos desde que as fontes sejam citadas. Reproduções com fins comerciais são proibidas.
Titulo alternativo
item.page.organization.alternative
Variações no nome completo
Autor(a)
Orientador(a)
Editor(a)
Organizador(a)
Coordenador(a)
item.page.organization.manager
Outras autorias
Palestrante/Mediador(a)/Debatedor(a)
Coodenador do Projeto
Resumo
This working paper examines the validity of the claim that ‘scaling up’ ODA in developing countries will cause ‘Dutch Disease’ effects that slow growth and human development. The most common concerns are increased inflation and exchange-rate appreciation. Consistent with a recent IMF re-appraisal, the paper maintains that such problems can be mitigated if ODA is properly ‘spent’ and ‘absorbed’. However, many governments either do not spend ODA (because of the fear of inflation) or do not ‘absorb’ it (because of the fear of appreciation). The paper argues that the critical issues are whether 1) increased government spending is focused on public investment and 2) increased imports are focused on capital goods. A central point is that in many developing countries, under-utilized productive capacities can readily respond to rising government demand for domestic goods and services. The paper ends with the warning that although the short-run macroeconomic impact of ODA can be managed, its longer-term impact could, indeed, be adverse if it reduces efforts to mobilize domestic resources, such as public revenue and national savings.
