The harmful effects of foreign aid on governance institutions have long been documented. This paper uncovers an additional mechanism by which such harm is caused: entangled decision-making with partners. Using a realist synthesis approach to examine the locus of decision-making in aid interventions, the paper highlights the existence of three different ‘decision spaces’. Notwithstanding the focus on partnerships in aid, many decisions are made within the ‘Local Decision Space’, which is where local actors – state and non-state; formal and informal; and including leaders, organisations, groups, and individuals – make choices without directly involving donors or intermediaries.
In contrast, decision-making within the ‘Partnership Decision Space’ is ‘entangled’, where practices such as negotiation, bargaining, and ‘policy dialogue’ are used by external actors to influence decision-making. The paper explores how this ‘entangled decision-making’ can harm governance institutions by undermining accountability, learning, legitimacy, mobilisation, and coordination. This highlights the potential for a different approach by donors, which moves away from entangled decision-making, and instead focuses on creating an ‘enabling environment’ for the Local Decision Space, and ‘crowding in’ decision-making by local actors.
