<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Michael, M.S.</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/15016/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Tied to capital or untied foreign aid? (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/13045/</link>
      <pubDate>1998-01-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>A two-country trade model of foreign aid is developed. The aid-receiving country suffers from Harris-Todaro type unemployment. Aid is either untied, tied to sector-specific capital, or tied to intersectorally mobile capital. These types of aid are compared by examining their terms-of-trade and welfare effects to show that (i) welfare paradoxes are possible, (ii) the world as a whole may gain from aid, (iii) a conflict of interest concerning the type of aid may arise between donor and recipient, and (iv) under plausible conditions untied aid is better for the recipient and the world.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>