Historical changes in US and Japanese foreign aid to the Asia-Pacific region

被引:10
作者
Grant, R
Nijman, J
Jan, NJ
机构
[1] UNIV MIAMI,DEPT GEOG,CORAL GABLES,FL 33124
[2] UNIV MIAMI,PROGRAM INT STUDIES,CORAL GABLES,FL 33124
关键词
D O I
10.1111/0004-5608.00040
中图分类号
P9 [自然地理学]; K9 [地理];
学科分类号
0705 ; 070501 ;
摘要
This study examines responses of the world's two largest foreign-aid donors, the U.S. and Japan, to the end of the Cold War. Using the Asia-Pacific region to assess changes in U.S. and Japanese aid policies, the analysis compares the rhetoric and discourses evident in policy documents with actual aid disbursements to the region before and after the Cold War. In the early days of the post- Cold War, the U.S. refocused aid discourse from geopolitics toward ''sustainable development'' and ''democratization,'' but these goals are now challenged by an aid-fatigued and Republican-dominated Congress. By contrast, Japanese support for aid remains strong. The declared purpose of Japanese aid has been broadened beyond their Cold War commercial orientation toward global goals. In terms of disbursements to the region, the U.S. and Japan have responded in opposite ways. While the Japanese are increasing their presence in the region, the U.S. is disengaging, and the gap between the two is increasing over time. The Japanese appear to have adopted a regional political role commensurate with their economic power.
引用
收藏
页码:32 / 51
页数:20
相关论文
共 64 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1993, The European Community and the Developing Countries Cambridge
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1991, TYING AID
[3]  
[Anonymous], ASIAN AFFAIRS
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1993, The East Asian Miracle: Economic Growth and Public Policy
[5]  
Baldwin David., 1985, EC STATECRAFT
[6]  
Bergsten C. F., 1993, PACIFIC DYNAMISM INT
[7]  
BLOCH JC, 1991, YEN DEV JAPANESE FOR, P70
[8]  
BLUESTEIN P, 1995, WASHINGTON POST 0612, P21
[9]  
DAWKINS W, 1995, FINANCIAL TIMES 0523, P3
[10]   FOREIGN-AID TO AFRICA - A GEOGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS [J].
DIETZ, T ;
HOUTKAMP, J .
TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR ECONOMISCHE EN SOCIALE GEOGRAFIE, 1995, 86 (03) :278-295