Political risks are inescapable in development. Donors keep them in check with a range of tools, but existing options provide little guidance about how political forms of risk can—or should—shape programme design. This paper presents a novel framework that offers practical guidance on how to think about and manage some of these risks. This is based on a review of programmes delivered by the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, which provides a specific type of aid: democracy assistance. Political forms of risk have a strong influence on that aid, so it provides a valuable example. Our framework centres on two trade-offs inherent in the provision of aid for democracy support. The first relates to the type of approach employed in a programme; should it focus on a thematic issue or a specific event, or should it focus primarily on an institution and its processes? The second concerns the scope of a programme in terms of who it includes. Understanding the costs and benefits of these trade-offs will help development practitioners to make decisions about political risks in a more rigorous and transparent way and, potentially, to shift from a culture of risk aversion, to one of informed risk-taking.

中文翻译：

---

风险、政治和发展：英国民主援助的教训

政治风险在发展中不可避免。捐助者使用一系列工具对其进行检查，但现有选项几乎没有提供关于政治形式的风险如何或应该如何影响项目设计的指导。本文提出了一个新颖的框架，为如何思考和管理其中一些风险提供了实用的指导。这是基于对威斯敏斯特民主基金会提供的计划的审查，该基金会提供特定类型的援助：民主援助。政治形式的风险对这种援助有很大的影响，因此它提供了一个宝贵的例子。我们的框架以提供民主支持援助所固有的两个权衡为中心。第一个与计划中采用的方法类型有关；如果它侧重于一个主题问题或一个特定事件，还是应该主要关注机构及其流程？第二个涉及计划的范围，包括谁。了解这些权衡的成本和收益将有助于发展从业者以更严格和透明的方式做出有关政治风险的决策，并有可能从规避风险的文化转变为知情风险承担文化。