Weaknesses of the OECD-DAC data
Excludes much of the ‘aid bundle’: for example, remittances, charitable donations from the public, foreign investment, funds that don’t meet the ‘official’ definition of ODA – which means that the financial flows here are just a tiny portion of resources which are intended to reduce poverty in poor countries.
Slow to publish: full datasets are not published until December of the following year (although limited preliminary data is published in April)
Difficult to match up with money received: the data here is on money that flows out of donor countries, not necessarily the money that flows into** **low-income countries. There are multiple reasons why these two might not match up as lots of ODA is actually spent in the donor country (but still qualifies as ODA, if the economic welfare of a developing country is the ‘main’ aim). For example, some of it goes towards debt relief, or student costs in the donor country.
Difficult to match inputs with outcomes: as there are no economic/social indicators included here, it’s difficult to see whether projects had the desired outcomes – eg. increased spending on malaria prevention vs. a reduction in malaria prevalence
Not so useful for:
- helping recipient countries manage their aid flows – for this, a dedicated Aid Management Platform is much more useful
- tracking aid beyond recipient government level – what happened after it went to a specific government?
