Reference no: EM132363423 , Length: word count:3000

Assignment -

Instructions: Research topic is the following: Why some disasters receive fund while others don't?

Hypothesis 1: Certain disasters (e.g. earthquakes) receive more fund than others regardless of the number of people affected.

Hypothesis 2: Donors tend to provide more aid to democratic countries than to non-democratic ones.

Need the analysis covering 9 different donors: Total, Official, World Bank Group, Multilaterals, USA, UK, France, Norway, Japan.

Attached data for different sectors regarding all donors:

• Sector 1000: covers all
• Sector 700: Humanitarian Aid
• Sector 720: Emergency Response
• Sector 730: Reconstruction Relief and Rehabilitation
• Sector 740: Disaster Prevention and Preparedness

An extract of my proposal that might be useful: Foreign policymakers still concentrate mainly on issues such as terrorism, civil war and violence but it is not sufficiently emphasized that natural disasters are much more destructive. The number of people affected by natural disasters worldwide is far more significant, not to mention economic losses. Consequently, there is a huge need for disaster relief and disaster risk management. Although a growing number of organizations provide aid, it rarely ever lines up with actual needs. This means that the worst disasters do not always get the most aid. The difference is even bigger when it comes to smaller disasters that do not receive enough media attention and do not make the headlines, thus receive minimal or no attention from donors. Even though disaster funding is a relatively new concept, there are already several studies based on this topic.

However, there is a gap in the existing literature that focuses on which factors determine whether a natural disaster receives aid or not. I believe this issue needs more attention since the number of disasters and the number of their victims rise from year to year. In my dissertation, I will examine two of the main contributing factors that influence donors among many others (the type of the disaster, location, scale, political reasons and media coverage) and try to find an answer to why some disasters got fund while others do not. For instance, Africa and Asia usually get less attention than Europe and the American continent. In addition, it is interesting that draughts and famines are somewhat ignored while earthquakes in most of the cases make it to the headlines. Among the political reasons is the regime type of the given country. Isolated or self-reliant countries - such as North Korea or China - often refuse relief.

Note - Use mixed methods research because believe that the combination of qualitative and quantitative approaches provides a better understanding of the research than any approach alone.

After the literature review, will do two case study analysis. Compare the cases and their circumstances, analysing disasters that did not receive any or significant amount of money and one that did. A relevant example of a negative case could be the floods in Pakistan that occurred in 2010 and more people were affected by it than by the 2010 Haiti earthquake, the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami and the 2005 Pakistan earthquake combined. I will examine the above-mentioned factors such as the country's relationship with the donors, political relations, media coverage etc. The earthquake that occurred in Haiti might be the example of a disaster that received significant relief.

The qualitative analysis will consist of two correlation and regression models. The hypothesis is that donors tend to support democratic countries hit by earthquakes more than non-democratic countries hit by other types of disasters. The results will show if the regime type and the type of disaster indeed influence the distribution of relief funds and if yes, we will also get an answer to what extent these variables have an impact on countries receiving relief or not.

Considering the time we have, it would also be suitable to have an analysis covering the relationship between aid provided in total for each country and the regime type. And then another analysis regarding the type of disaster (EM-DAT) and the aid provided. I would definitely need sector 1000 for all donors and if the time-frame is too tight, just highlighting some of the other sectors where the result might be surprising.

Need the analysis part and provide the results in about 3,000 words with comments on how to extend it. Need STATA Analysis+ 3000 words Report.

Attachment:- STATA Analysis Assignment Files.rar