Politics and the Effectiveness of Humanitarian Aid

Does the source of Non-Government Organization (NGO) funding affect how effective these groups may be in achieving their goals? Some organizations and scholars argue that accepting funds from governments and other political entities reduces their autonomy and makes it more difficult for them to operate in politically sensitive areas. In contrast, other groups happily accept funds from these governmental sources. This project examines the efficacy of humanitarian NGOs as a function of their funding sources, with a particular focus on civil conflict. I argue that due to differences in the incentives and ability of private and public donors to hold NGOs accountable for their activities, organizations which receive funding primarily from private donors are less accountable than are organizations which receive funds primarily from public donors. Due to these differences in accountability, I further argue that publicly funded NGOs should be more effective in achieving their goals than privately funded organizations. This argument is tested using an original dataset on the activities of three of the most prominent humanitarian NGOs for the period from 2004-2007, and finds that publicly funded organizations do in fact exhibit greater levels of aid effectiveness than privately funded organizations. Furthermore, there is some evidence that aid from privately funded organizations may in fact make crises worse, rather than improving them. The results of this study have implications not only for scholars interested in aid efficacy organizations and scholars, but most importantly for the individuals whom they seek to assist, whose lives and welfare critically depend on effective and efficient assistance.