Économie politique

G19 - Public policy, aid and international security

Date: Jun 5 | Heure: 01:45pm to 03:15pm | Salle:

Chair/Président/Présidente : Patrick Clark (Saint Mary's University)

Competing Aid and Public Perception: Evidence from the African Continent: Yongzheng (Parker) Li (University of British Columbia), Xiaojun Li (University of British Columbia)
Abstract: Does aid from competing countries shape public perceptions of those countries? This question is particularly relevant for Africa, where the intersection of infrastructure and development needs with the continent's geopolitical potential has attracted aid from China, the US, the UK, and France. However, research in recent years, limited by data constraints, typically examines the effect of aid on the perceptions of one single donor country, especially China, with mixed results. This paper bridges the gap using the newly compiled Geocoded Official Development Assistance Dataset and the Afrobarometer public opinion data. This study examines the influence of competing aid by spatially linking aid projects in Africa from China, the US, the UK, and France to local citizens’ perceptions of which country serves as the best development model for their home country. Given Africa's colonial history with Western powers and China’s rising influence, the paper hypothesizes that aid generally improves perceptions of China as the development model for their home country, but that effect is subdued when accounting for the number and proximity of aid projects from other countries. The nature of the projects matters: proximity to infrastructure projects correlates with more favorable perceptions, while exposure to resource-intensive projects has the opposite effect. These findings offer new insights into how Africa reacts to competing aid, perceives and engages with China, and how the US and its Western allies can strategically use aid to strengthen relations with those countries and respond to China's growing presence.

Do as I say, not as I do? Ministers’ Gender, Educational Background and Fiscal Policy: Nicola Nones (University of Toronto)
Abstract: Do individual policymakers matter for economic policy and, if so, under which conditions do they matter? Does a formal training in economics lead policymakers to implement a distinct set of fiscal policies? Do female policymakers differ from their male counterparts? This article aims to answer these questions with respect to fiscal (austerity) policy by analyzing regional and global samples between 1978 and 2019. By focusing on a subset of fiscal policies that are weakly orthogonal to the business cycle, I abstract from the most contentious debates in macroeconomics which revolve around the ‘best’ fiscal response to economic shocks. Moreover, I investigate the effects of economists on fiscal policy in a most-likely-case approach, i.e. when economic theory is by and large in agreement. Overall, I find little evidence that either the Head of the Executive or the relevant Minister’s formal education in economics is (unconditionally) associated with fiscal policy. Nevertheless, governments led by economists are more likely to implement fiscal consolidation when the government is less fractionalized, when they are supported by a parliamentary majority, and when there are fewer institutional constraints on the executive. By contrast, I only a weak and model-dependent negative association between fiscal consolidation and having a woman as the Head of Government and/or as Finance Minister.

Alliance and Autonomy: Japan’s Approach to Economic Security in a Shifting Global Order: Jemma Kim (Meiji University)
Abstract: This paper investigates Japan’s integration of economic security within its foreign policy framework, focusing on its alliance with the United States and the balancing act between alliance commitments and strategic autonomy. As Japan increasingly prioritizes economic security in response to challenges such as supply chain fragility, technological competition, and economic coercion, it navigates both opportunities for enhanced cooperation and areas of potential conflict with the US. Using Neoclassical Realism as a guiding framework, this study analyzes how Japan’s domestic political and economic imperatives, alongside US expectations, shape its economic security policies in critical areas like technology governance and critical resource protection. By highlighting Japan’s approach to securing its economic sovereignty within the constraints of its alliance, the paper provides insights into the future trajectory of Japan-US relations and Japan’s evolving role in regional and global stability.

Identifying the Public Interest in UK Public Policy for Digital Technology: Sarah Cheung (University of Edinburgh)
Abstract: The UK government has made growing its tech sector a key goal, to which it has committed billions (BEIS 2017; BEIS/DCMS 2019; DCMS 2022). This growth is predicated on developing expansive uses of new digital technologies such as AI. However, these goals are being pursued in an uncertain regulatory backdrop, and it is widely recognized internationally that appropriate regulation for using these technologies is needed (OECD 2019). Drawing on ideational approaches to institutional change (Béland 2009; Campbell 1998, 2002; Fischer 2003; Hay 1996; Schmidt 2008), this paper suggests that distinctive ways in which the idea of ‘public interest’ - and its synonym, ‘common good’ – is presented has a key role in shaping regulatory frameworks, which in turn influence the trajectory of the digital economy. This paper uses frame analysis (Hall 1993; Hay 1996; Rein & Schon 1996; Stone 1989; Surel 2000) to explore presentations of ‘common good’ and ‘public interest’ in recent public policy literature produced by actors in the UK policymaking landscape on digital technologies. It identifies distinctive state-centric public interest frames in the UK policy landscape and a network of actors (Haas 1992; Sabatier 1998) involved in mobilising and supporting specific frames of public interest in relation to uses of data and digital technologies: these frames are used to argue for certain ‘light’ and ‘nimble’ approaches to regulatory intervention, which above all, must not be allowed to hinder digital innovation and the high-profile government initiatives to expand the UK’s tech sector and public sector uses of digital technologies.