Making Technical Assistance Work for Developing Countries

It's been almost a year since I left Freetown, Sierra Leone, after a two-year service as an Overseas Development Institute Fellow at the Ministry of Finance. My time there was incredibly rewarding, providing a first-hand look at the ups and downs of the global development space.

One thing that immediately struck me about Sierra Leone's public sector was the sheer proliferation of technical assistance (TA). Technical assistance is development support delivered through the transfer of expertise, skills, and knowledge, often in the form of capacity building, consulting and advisory services, training, or institutional twinning, in lieu of direct financial aid.

Like traditional aid, technical assistance has been an integral part of Official Development Assistance (ODA) for decades. It's designed to lend developing countries "capable hands" to support the public sector, drive capacity-building, and upskill local staff. While the objective is laudable, the outcome is often less favourable. In too many cases, technical assistance ends up doing more harm than good, inadvertently worsening what is known as the "capability trap", a situation where the implementation capability of the state is severely limited and/or improving at a sluggish pace.

The Technical Assistance Paradox

This is not a problem unique to Sierra Leone. From the World Bank to the IMF and specialized NGOs, consultants and advisors are integral to the public sector machinery in many developing countries, often operating in silos or in conjunction with local partners through special delivery units. 

The central paradox of technical assistance is this: while it is supposed to build capacity and improve program implementation, it can foster a dependency syndrome. When external experts consistently fill critical operational or analytical gaps, the local staff meant to be upskilled can become complacent and reliant on the "extra hands."

Just as the influx of oil revenue can lead to the "Dutch Disease", the over-reliance on external expertise can stunt institutional growth and capacity. To escape this trap, technical assistance should embody the following principles to enhance effectiveness.

Ownership and Local Context Must Be Prioritised

No matter how skilled an advisor is, if there is no genuine interest or local ownership, the assistance will yield little to no results. From my experience, the most impactful and long-lasting technical assistance arrangements are those grounded in local realities.

Partners must make a determined effort to understand the institutional context, the unspoken rules, and the political nuances before crafting solutions. As a technical advisor, it is tempting to apply well-established theoretical frameworks and experiences from other jurisdictions to existing issues in the recipient country. While it is important to extrapolate lessons, I found that coming in with an open mind and making an effort to engage in dialogue with local consultants and civil servants who often hold invaluable contextual knowledge is far more helpful. Development is not a one-size-fits-all space. What worked in Ghana might not work in Côte d'Ivoire, even if they share a border.

Without local ownership, even the most comprehensive reforms risk being fleeting. Once the advisors depart, so does the project, and the benefiting agencies revert to old practices. This risks fostering what Economist Lant Pritchett describes as “isomorphic mimicry,” where a country adopts all the outward trappings of a capable system (institutions, agencies, and ministries) without the actual functionality. Sustainable change requires capacity built in conjunction with local actors.

Align, Align, Align

As the famous saying goes, "too many cooks spoil the broth." This is especially true for technical assistance in resource-constrained environments. It was not uncommon to see several partners working on the same issue without any knowledge of each other. This fragmentation often led to confusion and poor project outcomes.

To prevent duplicity and wastage, the development community must prioritize collaboration and harmonization. Given the endless list of priorities in many developing countries, limited resources (including technical assistance) must be managed wisely. I found that the most impactful partners were those who first sought to understand what was already being done, who the key players were, and what existing solutions were on the table. To fill a gap, you must first identify it, not assume it.

The Political Economy Matters, A Lot

As an economist, it is easy to focus only on the quantitative and theoretical aspects of reform. But I've learned that the political context, the nuances, and the norms of a particular environment are equally, if not more, important.

In many developing countries, politics is the key lens for understanding bureaucratic processes: from who is appointed to head an agency to how budgets are allocated and even recruitment policies. A failure to understand the underlying political economy is a recipe for the potential failure of any intended reform. Technical assistance relationships are only fruitful when advisors appreciate the unique context of the country they are serving and apply this to their work.

Think Long-Term and Build a Sustainable Exit Strategy

A two-day debt sustainability workshop in a resort or a one-off payment for a software license rarely leads to sustainable impact. Like all good things, technical assistance comes to an end, and success is determined by what happens afterwards.

Technical assistance is most successful when it has a clear intention from the onset to upskill staff in the recipient agency to continue to apply learned knowledge and skills after the project concludes. It should also complement staffing needs in agencies, not replace them.

Furthermore, technical assistance programs should map out clear exit strategies and incentives for local teams to continue the work after external support ends. As we know, when it comes to development, sustainability is the ultimate metric of success.

Conclusion

We cannot ignore the significance of technical assistance in driving development outcomes across Emerging Markets and Developing Economies (EMDEs). Through various instruments, technical assistance plays a pivotal role in strengthening state capacity and institutional capabilities.

However, in an era of tighter fiscal constraints, it is no longer enough for technical assistance to simply exist. It must deliver value for money and truly support the reform agenda of recipient countries. By prioritizing local ownership, aligning efforts, understanding the political landscape, and focusing on long-term sustainability, we can transform technical assistance from a potential dependency trap into a powerful engine for genuine, lasting development.

For donors, it means recognizing that local institutions and expertise matter. Yes, they might have constraints, but they also have knowledge and context that dramatically improve the chances of success. For governments, it means seeing technical assistance as a true partnership rather than a replacement for local capacity.

My time in Sierra Leone reaffirmed that the best technical assistance isn't defined by the number of consultants or deliverables produced. It is about sharing expertise and truly strengthening the intrinsic capacity of the host agency. The true measure of success should be a genuine collaboration that unifies global knowledge with local context to create a long-lasting impact that endures long after the advisors have said goodbye.