ABSTRACT
Government-to-government transfers of donor funds have tremendous political advantages for the recipient government but it carries heavy administrative costs. The donor perspective must transcend not only the limits inherent in bilateralism but also in the short time horizon that donor strategy rests upon. The terms agreed upon are typically those of the individual donor agency, again creating the problem of administrative overload for any organisations that wishes to seek money from more than one donor. This chapter deals with some ideas about what might be done to overcome the institutional lethargy of the international development community and its negative consequences of efforts to assist the poor. The thinking within the international development community has gone through four separate phases: 1960s: 'trickle down', dominated by a strong central government, 1970s: 'basic needs', administered by decentralised government structures, 1980s: 'small is beautiful', realised by alternative institutions, and 1990s: 'enabling environment', provided by intermediary organisations.
