Search Climate Insights Directory

The paper examines infrastructure funding in Mali, specifically comparing 'traditional' donors (World Bank, European Commission) with 'non-traditional' donors (China). Using the third Bamako bridge as a case study, it argues that recipient governments evaluate aid through an investment model that balances capital costs, transaction costs, and risk profiles. The author finds that while Chinese aid is often perceived as 'tied' and carries higher long-term uncertainty, it is attractive due to low short-term risk and a 'South-South partner' identity. The study concludes that in a stable, resource-poor country like Mali, Chinese aid complements rather than substitutes for OECD aid, meaning it is less likely to undermine established good governance conditions.