Abstract
Governments have responded to the 2022 Russian invasion by committing substantial aid to Ukraine. This paper investigates this aid on a cross-national basis utilizing differences in economic, political, and geographic characteristics of donor countries. It advances the comprehension of aid allocation to Ukraine and argues that donors’ interests heavily influence bilateral aid to Ukraine. Empirically, a two-stage approach serves to identify the main determinants of aid allocation, analyzing both the initial decision to donate and the level of aid generosity. The regression analyses show that wealthier, more populous, more democratic countries as well as those who trade with Russia are more likely to support Ukraine while the impact of these factors is more nuanced when determining aid generosity. Ceteris paribus, EU and NATO members are more likely to donate and more generous in their aid efforts. The results also shed light on the complex role of former Soviet republics.
Acknowledgment
I thank Lukas Wellner and Prof. Dr. Axel Dreher for their contributions as supervisors of the bachelor thesis this paper developed from. Their continued support and guidance throughout the process made this paper possible.
Sample countries (gate-keeping stage).
| Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Congo (Democratic Republic of the), Costa Rica, Cote d’Ivoire, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Liberia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Zambia |
Kiel institute donor countries (level-setting stage).
| Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States |
-
Donor classification in Antezza et al. 2022.
References
Alesina, A., and D. Dollar. 2000. “Who Gives Foreign Aid to Whom and Why?” Journal of Economic Growth 5: 33–63. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009874203400.10.1023/A:1009874203400Search in Google Scholar
Antezza, A., A. Frank, P. Frank, L. Franz, I. Kharitonov, B. Kumar, E. Rebinskaya, and C. Trebesch. 2022. “The Ukraine Support Tracker: Which Countries Help Ukraine and How?” (Tech. rep.). KIEL working paper.Search in Google Scholar
Applebaum, A. 2022. “Calamity Again.” https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/02/ukraine-identity-russia-patriotism/622902/ (accessed December 15, 2022).Search in Google Scholar
Bachmann, R., D. Baqaee, C. Bayer, M. Kuhn, A. Löschel, B. Moll, A. Peichl, K. Pittel, and M. Schularick. 2022. “Was wäre, wenn…? Die wirtschaftlichen Auswirkungen eines Importstopps russischer Energie auf Deutschland.” Ifo Schnelldienst 75: 6–14.Search in Google Scholar
Bailey, M. A., A. Strezhnev, and E. Voeten. 2017. “Estimating Dynamic State Preferences from United Nations Voting Data.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 61 (2): 430–56. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002715595700.Search in Google Scholar
Balla, E., and G. Y. Reinhardt. 2008. “Giving and Receiving Foreign Aid: Does Conflict Count?” World Development 36 (12): 2566–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.03.008.Search in Google Scholar
Becker, T., B. Eichengreen, Y. Gorodnichenko, S. Guriev, S. Johnson, T. Mylovanov, K. Rogoff, and B. Weder di Mauro. 2022. A Blueprint for the Reconstruction of Ukraine. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research.Search in Google Scholar
Bellinger, J. B. 2022. “How Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine Violates International Law.” Council on Foreign Affairs.Search in Google Scholar
Caudill, S. B. 1988. “An Advantage of the Linear Probability Model over Probit or Logit.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics & Statistics 50 (4): 425–7, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.1988.mp50004005.x.Search in Google Scholar
Cingranelli, D. L., and T. E. Pasquarello. 1985. “Human Rights Practices and the Distribution of US Foreign Aid to Latin American Countries.” American Journal of Political Science 29 (3): 539–63, https://doi.org/10.2307/2111142.Search in Google Scholar
Dumoulin, M. 2022. “Echo of Empire: Why Russia’s War on Ukraine Troubles All Post-soviet Countries.” https://ecfr.eu/article/echo-of-empire-why-russias-war-on-ukrainetroubles-all-post-soviet-countries/ (accessed December 16, 2022).Search in Google Scholar
Dworkin, A. 2022. “International Law and the Invasion of Ukraine.” https://ecfr.eu/article/international-law-and-the-invasion-of-ukraine/ (accessed December 19, 2022).Search in Google Scholar
European Commission. 2022. “Standard Eurobarometer 97 Summer 2022 Public Opinion in the European Union.” Eurobarometer 97 (Summer 2022).Search in Google Scholar
Farzanegan, M. R., and H. F. Gholipour. 2022. “Ukraine Invasion and Votes in Favour of Russia in the UN General Assembly.” MAGKS Joint Discussion Paper Series in Economics.Search in Google Scholar
Farzanegan, M. R., and H. Gholipour. 2023. “Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine and Votes in Favor of Russia in the Un General Assembly.” International Interactions 49 (3): 454–70.10.1080/03050629.2023.2179046Search in Google Scholar
Federle, J., A. Meier, G. J. Müller, and V. Sehn. 2022. “Proximity to War: The Stock Market Response to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine.” CEPR Discussion Paper.10.2139/ssrn.4060222Search in Google Scholar
Freedom House Index. 2021. “Freedom in the World 2021.” https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world (accessed December 15, 2022).Search in Google Scholar
Fuchs, A., A. Dreher, and P. Nunnenkamp. 2014. “Determinants of Donor Generosity: A Survey of the Aid Budget Literature.” World Development 56: 172–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.09.004.Search in Google Scholar
Herre, B. 2021. “Identifying Ideologues: A Global Dataset on Political Leaders, 1945–2019.” British Journal of Political Science.10.1017/S0007123422000217Search in Google Scholar
Hoeffler, A., and O. Sterck. 2022. “Is Chinese Aid Different?” World Development 156: 105908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105908.Search in Google Scholar
Hunter, R. 2022. “The Ukraine Crisis: Why and what Now?” Survival 64 (1): 7–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2022.2032953.Search in Google Scholar
Kuzio, T. 2022. “Why Russia Invaded Ukraine.” Horizons: Journal of International Relations and Sustainable Development 21 (Summer 2022): 40–51.Search in Google Scholar
Lanoszka, A., and J. Becker. 2022. “The Art of Partial Commitment: The Politics of Military Assistance to Ukraine.” Post-Soviet Affairs 39 (3): 173–94.10.1080/1060586X.2022.2162758Search in Google Scholar
Lawson, A. 2022. “Nord Stream 1: Gazprom Announces Indefinite Shutdown of Pipeline.” https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/sep/02/nord-stream-1-gazpromannounces-indefinite-shutdown-of-pipeline (accessed January 12, 2023).Search in Google Scholar
Lundbladh, A. 2023. “If Ukrainian Victory is Existential for Europe, the EU Member States Must Step up Military Support.” https://sceeus.se/en/publications/if-ukrainianvictory-is-existential-for-europe-the-eu-member-states-must-step-up-military-support/ (accessed December 20, 2022).Search in Google Scholar
Marat, E. 2022. “Former Soviet States are Distancing Themselves from their Old Imperial Master.” https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/05/10/soviet-imperialism-colonialismukraine-kazakhstan-georgia-moldova/ (accessed December 16, 2022).Search in Google Scholar
Masters, J. 2022. “Ukraine: Conflict at the Crossroads of Europe and Russia.” Council on Foreign Relations, 1.Search in Google Scholar
Mayer, T., and S. Zignago. 2011. “Notes on CEPII’s Distances Measures: The GeoDist Database.” CEPII Working Paper.10.2139/ssrn.1994531Search in Google Scholar
Milner, H. V., and D. H. Tingley. 2010. “The Political Economy of US Foreign Aid: American Legislators and the Domestic Politics of Aid.” Economics & Politics 22 (2): 200–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0343.2009.00356.x.Search in Google Scholar
Mood, C. 2010. “Logistic Regression: Why We Cannot Do What We Think We Can Do, and What We Can Do About It.” European Sociological Review 26 (1): 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcp006.Search in Google Scholar
NATO. 2022. “Response to Russia’s War on Ukraine.” https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_37750.htm (accessed January 08, 2023).Search in Google Scholar
OECD. 2021. “Official Development Assistance (ODA).” https://www.oecd.org/dac/financing-sustainable-development/development-finance-standards/official-developmentassistance.htm (accessed December 09, 2022).Search in Google Scholar
Olofsgård, A. 2022. “Foreign Aid to Ukraine: Lessons from the Literature on Strategic Foreign Aid.” Free Network Policy Brief Series.Search in Google Scholar
Olson, M., and R. Zeckhauser. 1966. “An Economic Theory of Alliances.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 48 (3): 266–79, https://doi.org/10.2307/1927082.Search in Google Scholar
Pellicciari, I. 2022. “Aid in War or Aid to War? Foreign Aid in the 2022 War in Ukraine.” Review of International Affairs 73 (1186): 61–78. https://doi.org/10.18485/iipe_ria.2022.73.1186.3.Search in Google Scholar
Round, J. I., and M. Odedokun. 2004. “Aid Effort and its Determinants.” International Review of Economics & Finance 13 (3): 293–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2003.11.006.Search in Google Scholar
SIPRI. 2022. “Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.” Importer/Exporter TIV Tables. https://armstrade.sipri.org/armstrade/page/values.php (accessed January 20, 2023).Search in Google Scholar
Spindel, J. 2018. “Beyond Military Power: The Symbolic Politics of Conventional Weapons Transfers.” Doctoral diss., University of Minnesota.Search in Google Scholar
Sterck, O. 2019. “Beyond the Stars.” Journal of Economic Surveys 33 (5): 1409–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12330.Search in Google Scholar
Strupczewski, J., and G. Baczynska. 2022. “Hungary Vetoes EU Aid for Ukraine, Bloc Delays Decision on Funds for Budapest.” https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eulooks-win-hungary-support-ukraine-aid-return-eu-funds-access-2022-12-06/ (accessed January 25, 2023).Search in Google Scholar
Trepanowski, R., D. Drażkowski, P. Burdun, and D. Bojarski. 2022. “In Times of Need. Cross-Country Investigating of the Determinants of Aid Allocation for Ukraine During the 2022 Russian Invasion.” Preprint.10.21203/rs.3.rs-2034774/v1Search in Google Scholar
UNHCR. 2022. “Ukraine Refugee Situation Operational Data Portal.” https://data.unhcr.org/en/situations/ukraine (accessed January 26, 2023).Search in Google Scholar
United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. 2022. “Ukraine Private Sector Donations Tracker.” https://data.humdata.org/viz-ukraine-pstracker/ (accessed December 15, 2022).Search in Google Scholar
U.S. Department of State. 2022. “United with Ukraine.” https://www.state.gov/united-with-ukraine/ (accessed January 07, 2023).Search in Google Scholar
Voeten, E. 2013. “Data and Analyses of Voting in the United Nations: General Assembly.” In Routledge Handbook of International Organization, 54–66. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Wooldridge, J. M. 2010. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. London: MIT press.Search in Google Scholar
World Bank. 2021. “Data on Net Official Development Assistance Received (Current USD).” https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/dt.oda.odat.cd (accessed January 09, 2023).Search in Google Scholar
World Bank. 2022a. “2021 Population, Total.” https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL (accessed January 03, 2023).Search in Google Scholar
World Bank. 2022b. “GDP Per Capita 2021 (Current USD).” https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD (accessed January 02, 2023).Search in Google Scholar
World Bank. 2022c. “Military Expenditure (Percent of GDP).” https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS?most_recent_value_desc=true (accessed January 12, 2023).Search in Google Scholar
World Bank. 2022d. “World Integrated Trade Solution.” https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/Country/RUS/Year/2019/TradeFlow/EXPIMP/%20Partner/bycountry (accessed January 20, 2023).Search in Google Scholar
Yarhi-Milo, K., A. Lanoszka, and Z. Cooper. 2016. “To Arm or to Ally? The Patron’s Dilemma and the Strategic Logic of Arms Transfers and Alliances.” International Security 41 (2): 90–139. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00250.Search in Google Scholar
© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Economic Policy Making Under Hardening Fiscal Constraints
- Policy Papers (No Special Focus)
- A Latticework of Inflation Models
- A Comparative Evaluation of Fiscal Stabilization Strategies during the Covid-19 Pandemic with Germany as a Reference Point
- The Relationship Between the German Current Account and Financial Account: Evidence from the Toda-Yamamoto Causality Approach
- The Tax Attractiveness of EU Locations for Corporate Investments: A Stocktaking of Past Developments and Recent Reforms
- Aid in Conflict: Determinants of International Aid Allocation to Ukraine During the 2022 Russian Invasion
- Policy Forum: Economic Policy in an Era of Hardening Fiscal Constraints
- Public Debt Ratios Will Increase For Some Time. We Must Make Sure That They Do Not Explode
- An EU Fund to Incentivise Public Investments with Positive Externalities
- The Case for Putting a Public Investment Clause into the German Debt Brake
- EU Debt Instruments and Fiscal Transparency: The Case of the EU Recovery Fund
- Explaining the Divergence in German and French Public Finances
- Fiscal Prospects for Italy
- The Swiss Debt Brake Is Democratic, Strict, Transparent, and Binding. A Model to Follow?
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Economic Policy Making Under Hardening Fiscal Constraints
- Policy Papers (No Special Focus)
- A Latticework of Inflation Models
- A Comparative Evaluation of Fiscal Stabilization Strategies during the Covid-19 Pandemic with Germany as a Reference Point
- The Relationship Between the German Current Account and Financial Account: Evidence from the Toda-Yamamoto Causality Approach
- The Tax Attractiveness of EU Locations for Corporate Investments: A Stocktaking of Past Developments and Recent Reforms
- Aid in Conflict: Determinants of International Aid Allocation to Ukraine During the 2022 Russian Invasion
- Policy Forum: Economic Policy in an Era of Hardening Fiscal Constraints
- Public Debt Ratios Will Increase For Some Time. We Must Make Sure That They Do Not Explode
- An EU Fund to Incentivise Public Investments with Positive Externalities
- The Case for Putting a Public Investment Clause into the German Debt Brake
- EU Debt Instruments and Fiscal Transparency: The Case of the EU Recovery Fund
- Explaining the Divergence in German and French Public Finances
- Fiscal Prospects for Italy
- The Swiss Debt Brake Is Democratic, Strict, Transparent, and Binding. A Model to Follow?