Monday, February 24 2020 10:52
Alexandr Avanesov

The World Bank published a study on the appropriation of assistance  by elites, including Armenia

The World Bank published a study on the appropriation of assistance  by elites, including Armenia

ArmInfo. The World Bank published on its website a study entitled "Appropriation  of  foreign Assistance by Elites. Evidence from Offshore Accounts". The document  mentions 22 countries, including Armenia.

The authors of the study are three economists, one of whom is a World  Bank employee. They studied data on foreign currency transfers from  two dozen countries, the most dependent on soft loans and World Bank  grants. And they found out that as soon as these countries receive a  substantial amount of assistance - more than 1% of GDP - almost  immediately out of them, the outflow of money to offshore begins.   Forming in  average, 7.5% of the received. But they steal, perhaps  more, the BBC study quotes.

"Such a modest scale is the lower threshold, since they only take  into account funds sent to foreign accounts and do not include spent  on real estate, luxury goods and so on," the study said.  "Experts  note that if the scale of aid increases to 3% of GDP, which is  typical for extremely impoverished countries due to the microscopic  size of their economy, the share of outflow doubles to 15%.  The  study included 22 countries: Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Afghanistan,  Burkina Faso, Burundi, Ghana, Guyana, Guinea-Bissau, Zambia,  Mauritania, Madagascar, Mozambique, Malawi, Mali, Niger, Rwanda, Sao  Tome and Principe, Sierra- Leone, Tanzania, Uganda, Eritrea and  Ethiopia. They were chosen because the amount of aid relative to the  size of their economy is significant, and the local banking system is  not developed, or even completely absent - and therefore the outflow  is clearly visible.

The BBC notes that the publication of the document was preceded by  scandalous circumstances: the study was ready in November, but the  World Bank decided to publish it only now, explaining that it delayed  publication because it "had doubts about the validity of the  conclusions."