What Works? Why? And for Whom? Impact of Norwegian and Chinese Development Assistance in Malawi and Zambia

China and Norway appear to have very different models of development cooperation. Norway's aid is characterized by generous transfer of resources earmarked for activities related to the promotion of gender, human rights, democratic governance and climate-smart agriculture. Successive Norwegian governments have consistently supported the goal of aid constituting at least one percent of GNI -- a principle, which probably has been the most contested feature of Norway's aid policy. And the goal of achieving the one-percent target has in turn resulted in a steady increase of the aid budget every year. In recent decades, this principle has witnessed cross-party consensus thanks largely to consistent pressure from a handful of political parties -- the holders of decisive swing votes -- and a group of influential civil society organizations directly involved with development aid. China highlights the principles of 'win-win' and 'non-interference' in its interactions with aid-recipient governments, and its activities that often include large infrastructure projects, that are more visible that those of Norway. It has been particularly interested in conveying the message that it appreciates what local actors can provide to China. Rather than charitable handouts, China has been relatively successful in making recipient governments believe that they too have something valuable to offer a major power in the world. Unlike Norway, China does not abide by the Paris principles of harmonization, alignment and results management. Moreover, it does not provide budget support or basket funds as many western donors do in countries like Malawi and Zambia. Rather, the Chinese model is largely premised of the belief that any form of assistance should be primarily based on the actual needs of a country as articulated by the government. We find that the realities on the ground in Malawi and Zambia, as perceived by aid agencies and their representatives, are much more favourable of Chinese interventions despite the widespread criticism of China?s activities often found in the western media. We also find that the Chinese model is evolving, with greater involvement of private sector actors in providing the Chinese government with information regarding the feasibility of aid projects aimed at boosting investments. We also find that the Norwegian model is showing signs of encouraging greater private sector involvement in aid policies within specific sectors.

The purpose of this study is to go beyond typical project evaluations and develop new research-based knowledge on the comparative impacts of Norwegian and Chinese aid in Malawi and Zambia on two crucial pillars of development -- gender equality and food s ecurity. Using livelihoods, rights-based and empowerment approaches as analytical tools, we will study the impact of Norwegian aid focused on gender and women's rights and the extent to which Norwegian and Chinese projects on food security strengthen live lihoods, affect gender and power relations and reduce poverty. What does a comparison between Norwegian and Chinese aid policies and practices reveal regarding aid efficiency, impact on livelihoods and gender equality, and what are the implications for do nors? And how can qualitative research, applied political analysis and quantitative approaches be integrated innovatively for a nuanced understanding of attribution and the impact of aid on poverty reduction? Overall, the study aims to contribute to an i mproved understanding of success factors and lessons learned in the process of implementing projects aimed at promoting gender equality and food security. While undertaking a comparative study of the impact of selected projects and programmes funded by No rway and China in Malawi and Zambia in the past decade, we will pay close attention to local contextual factors and the processes by which policies are planned, adapted or modified and then implemented in practice. The study will contribute to a more know ledge-based Norwegian development policy based on an examination of development theories on the one hand, and development policy objectives, practices and effects on the other. The project thus adapts an integrated (theory-policy-practice) and interdiscip linary approach.