17.11.2012 Views

Evaluating Country Programmes - OECD Online Bookshop

Evaluating Country Programmes - OECD Online Bookshop

Evaluating Country Programmes - OECD Online Bookshop

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

<strong>Evaluating</strong> <strong>Country</strong> <strong>Programmes</strong><br />

234<br />

Pre-1972: A typical developing country<br />

Prior to 1972, US assistance to Costa Rica was about equal to that of other<br />

Central American countries, and moderately higher on a per capita basis than US<br />

assistance to the larger Latin American countries. Latin America received more aid<br />

than other regions because the United States considered it “America’s backyard”.<br />

On the one hand, Costa Rica’s longstanding commitment to mass education and<br />

democracy, and the relatively high quality of government institutions, favoured aid<br />

to Costa Rica. On the other hand, its relatively high level of development made it a<br />

questionable claimant, and that trait led USAID in 1970 to plan to phase out assistance<br />

to Costa Rica.<br />

Basic needs (1972-80): Costa Rica as residual claimant<br />

The proposed phase-out of aid to Costa Rica brought declines in Mission staffing<br />

and programme levels, but a firm decision to actually terminate the programme<br />

was continually deferred. A shift in the overall USAID approach to “basic human<br />

needs”-emphasising help to the poorest in poorest countries should have accelerated<br />

the close of the Mission. Aid levels were reduced, but less so than might have<br />

been expected. <strong>Programmes</strong> in Latin America were cut, while those in Asia and<br />

Africa were increased. Though planned levels for Costa Rica were low, it consistently<br />

received more aid than was envisaged. When proposed projects failed to<br />

materialise in other countries for technical or for political reasons (such as a coup<br />

d’état), Costa Rica was always considered a safe place to put extra resources at the<br />

end of the fiscal year and, thus, was a “residual claimant” for available resources in<br />

Latin America. Costa Rican institutions could develop and manage projects well<br />

and ensure that they would benefit the poor.<br />

The 1980s: the Sandinista windfall<br />

Costa Rica’s fortunes as a claimant for US economic aid improved dramatically<br />

during 1982-92. Measured in 1994 dollars, it received more than USD1.4 billion<br />

during this decade, compared to USD0.8 billion in the previous 35 years. The debt<br />

crisis of the early 1980s hit Costa Rica hard, but no harder than it struck the rest of<br />

the developing world. The special justification for assistance to Central America was<br />

the leftist Sandinista Government in Nicaragua. The Reagan administration, which<br />

took office in 1981, adopted a foreign policy stance towards Nicaragua of isolation<br />

and hostility. The administration feared Sandinista support for guerrilla groups<br />

elsewhere in Central America, a view given credence when the outgoing Carter<br />

administration cut off US aid to Nicaragua because of mounting evidence of Sandinista<br />

support for Salvadoran insurgents. The United States gave great importance<br />

to the boast attributed to one of the Nicaraguan comandantes that Central American<br />

countries would fall like ripened fruit to revolution, with Costa Rica coming last, as<br />

dessert.<br />

<strong>OECD</strong> 1999

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!