Domestic & International Development Funding: A comparison of the Appalachian Regional Commission and USAID’s budget justifications

Abstract: This Bachelor’s thesis attempts to provide a better understanding of how US government-funded development agencies justify their funding, how that process is conducted, and in what ways it relates to the actual practice of development. Namely, the study looks at the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) and the United States Agency for International Development. Specifically, it looks at how these development organizations frame themselves and what type of discourse they employ to frame themselves as institutions worth funding. This is done through a qualitative design making use of content document analysis, along with two theoretical approaches in the analysis both securitization theory and realism’s approach to international politics. Structured into five parts the study aims to provide an easily digestible piece of text that also provides the reader with a sufficient basis of knowledge on the topic at hand. The research finds that budget justifications extensively differ from each other. Based on the material used in the study it is also found that there is a higher expectation for the ARC to be able to facilitate development compared to USAID. Finally, the paper tries to provide an explanation and reasoning for this being the case.