10 research outputs found

    On the Channel and Type of Aid: The Case of International Disaster Assistance

    Get PDF
    The aim of this paper is to determine the drivers of a donor’s decision on the composition of aid. We apply a dataset on international post-disaster assistance between 2000 and 2007 that includes information on the channel (bilateral vs. multilateral) and type (cash vs. in-kind) of each aid flow. Our results suggest that the choice of the channel and type of disaster assistance is mainly determined by strategic interests and transaction costs. Moreover, we find differences in the allocation behavior of OECD and non-OECD countries.Foreign aid, natural disasters, bilateral vs. multilateral, type of aid

    Aid, natural disasters and the samaritan's dilemma

    Get PDF
    This paper discusses the impact of foreign aid on the recipient country's preparedness against natural disasters. The theoretical model shows that foreign aid can have two opposing effects on a country's level of mitigating activities. In order to test the theoretical propositions, the authors analyze the effect of foreign aid dependence on ex-ante risk-management activity proxied by the death toll from major storms, floods and earthquakes occurring worldwide between 1980 and 2002. They find evidence that the crowding-out effect of foreign aid outweighs the preventive effect in the case of storms, while there is mixed evidence in the case of floods and earthquakes.Natural Disasters,Hazard Risk Management,Disaster Management,Population Policies,Post Conflict Reconstruction

    On the channel and type of international disaster aid

    Get PDF
    Research suggests that a donor country’s decision to provide post-disaster assistance is not only driven by the severity of a disaster and the resulting humanitarian needs in the recipient country, but also by strategic considerations. The authors argue that the identification of the determinants of the size of disaster assistance is a first step in the analysis of the donor’s behavior. Since all aid is not motivated by the same reasons, the evaluation of the donor country’s behavior requires a second step accounting for the type and the channel of aid provided. Using data on international disaster assistance between 2000 and 2007, the analysis examines both the donor countries'decision on the channel (bilateral versus multilateral) and the type of disaster relief (cash versus in-kind). The empirical results suggest that international disaster relief is not as much driven by the needs of the recipient country, but also by strategic interests (for example, oil or trade relationships) of the donor country. Bilateral and cash transfers are used as a vehicle to signal strategic interests, while multilateral and in-kind transfers are chosen to control for misuse in badly governed recipient countries.Hazard Risk Management,Natural Disasters,Gender and Health,Development Economics&Aid Effectiveness,Governance Indicators

    Uncertainty of Governmental Relief and the Crowding out of Insurance

    Get PDF
    This paper discusses the problem of crowding out of insurance by co-existing governmental relief programs - so-called 'charity hazard' - in a context of different institutional schemes of governmental relief in Austria and Germany. We test empirically whether an assured partial relief scheme (as in Austria) drives a stronger crowding out of private insurance than a scheme promising full relief which is subject to ad hoc political decision making (as in Germany). Our general finding is that the institutional design of governmental relief programs significantly affects the demand for private natural hazard insurance.Insurance demand, governmental relief, natural hazards

    On the Channel and Type of International Disaster Aid

    No full text
    Research suggests that a donor country?s decision to provide post-disaster assistance is not only driven by the severity of a disaster and the resulting humanitarian needs in the recipient country but also by strategic considerations. We argue that the identification of the determinants of the size of disaster assistance is a first step in the analysis of the donor?s behavior. Since all aid is not motivated by the same reasons, the evaluation of the donor country?s behavior requires a second step accounting for the type and the channel of aid provided. Using data on international disaster assistance between 2000 and 2007 one can examine both the donor countries' decision on the channel (bilateral vs. multilateral) and the type of disaster relief (cash vs. in-kind). The empirical results suggest that international disaster relief is not as much driven by the needs of the recipient country but also by strategic interests (e.g. oil, trade relationships) of the donor country. Bilateral and cash transfers are used as a vehicle to signal strategic interests, while multilateral and in-kind transfers are chosen to control for misuse in badly governed recipient countries.Foreign aid, natural disasters, bilateral vs. multilateral, type of aid

    Risikotransfersysteme für Naturkatastrophen in Deutschland, Österreich und der Schweiz: ein theoretischer und empirischer Vergleich

    No full text
    This paper compares alternative risk transfer mechanisms (insurance solutions) in three countries, which were affected by the flood event in August 2005, namely Germany, Austria and Switzerland. The comparison focuses on the ability of the institutional solutions to dampen economic shocks caused by natural hazard events. First, idealized types of obligatory insurance systems are evaluated by their liability to the economic problems of adverse selection, moral hazard, charity hazard and transaction costs. The results suggest that an obligatory insurance system with integrated prevention is able to overcome these problems the best. Second, a comparison of risk transfer mechanisms used in Germany, Austria and Switzerland shows that the Swiss system is capable to solve losses by acting comprehensive, fast and efficient. Diese Arbeit analysiert, inwieweit die unterschiedlichen Risikotransfersysteme dreier vom Augusthochwasser 2005 betroffener Länder, Deutschland (reine Marktlösung mit ergänzender staatlicher Notfallhilfe), Österreich (steuerfinanzierter Katastrophenfonds mit ergänzenden Marktangeboten) und Schweiz (Pflichtversicherung mit integrierter Prävention), geeignet sind, volkswirtschaftliche Störimpulse durch Naturereignisse zu reduzieren. Eine Gegenüberstellung von Idealtypen der Versicherungspflicht lässt den Schluss zu, dass Pflichtversicherungen eine relativ geringe Anfälligkeit für die versicherungsökonomischen Probleme der Negativauslese, des Moral- und des Charity Hazards sowie geringere Transaktionskosten aufweisen. Darüber hinaus deutet ein realtypischer Vergleich der drei Risikotransfersysteme anhand von ausgewählten Kennzahlen auf eine höhere Fähigkeit des Schweizer Pflichtversicherungssystems hin, Hochwasserschäden umfassend, schnell und effizient zu beheben.Naturgefahren, Elementarschadenversicherung, staatlicher Risikoausgleich, Versicherungsobligatorium
    corecore