This thesis aims to answer how countries prioritize bilateral aid, with a focus on Sweden’s bilateral aid allocation decisions. Foreign aid is one of humanity's most important partnerships, and with extensive crises the need is growing. Considering these challenges, it is principal to know why certain countries receive aid, and others do not. When needs are similar, and the development is at the same pace, what makes a country qualify for aid? Sweden is considered a good-performing aid allocator, with many recipient countries located in Africa. The aim is to find out what the decisive factor behind the aid allocation decision is, in order to create a foundation for the larger questions of why actors allocate aid to certain countries and not others. To answer this question, a comparative case study was conducted. The study uses a most-similar design, where Liberia and Sierra Leone are selected. Six strategic reports are analysed, alongside two informant interviews with centrally placed sources. The results show that despite earlier findings on Sweden as an altruistic allocator, enlightened self-interest and economic self-interest impacts the final decision. These results provide an insight that despite general behaviors of Sweden as allocator, when posed for similar cases, its own interest is decisive. Thus, this thesis contributes to the earlier literature, and the altruism of Swedish aid decisions is nuanced.
Johanna Fredriksson (Thu,) studied this question.