Chapter 5 | Page 205 implementation, especially for recipient States.78 This also diverts scarce State resources or some of the aid away from more urgent developmental purposes. 5.3.1.2 Conditionality and tied aid Conditionality and tied aid pose additional challenges and reduce the overall benefits to recipient States. While conditionalities related to human rights and democracy are undoubtedly positive, not all conditionality seeks to address such concerns. Donors are often accused of ‘foul play’ when conditionality is driven by political expediency, economic factors or security interests rather than human rights, democratic and governance objectives.79 Such political conditionalities are often characterised by paternalism, bribery, restraints and false signalling about the sincerity of aid80 and may be imposed on the recipient by the donor through a coercive relationship rather than one of mutual engagement and negotiation. Tied aid is the term used to describe aid that retains most of the value in the donor country by imposing the condition that certain goods and services must be procured from the donor country rather than the recipient country, which may in fact produce cheaper and better options. It is argued that tied aid is a de facto subsidy to companies in the donor country, thus raising the question of who actually benefits from aid.81 The main concern is that this form of aid represents home country subsidies in disguise.82 From a human rights perspective, such conditionalities create a significant challenge for States, especially poorer ones, in maximising resources for policy areas that are in 78 Ibid. 79 Olav Stokke (ed), Aid and Political Conditionality (Routledge, 2013). 80 Paul Collier et al, 'Redesigning Conditionality' (1997) 25(9) World Development 13991407; Machiko Nissanke, 'Shifting Grounds in Aid Relationships and Effectiveness Debate: Implications for Economic Development in Sub-Saharan Africa' in Machiko Nissanke and Yasutami Shimomura (eds), Aid as Handmaiden for the Development of Institutions: A New Comparative Perspective (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013) 48, 57. 81 Ortiz, above n 15, 70; Klingebiel, above n 3. 82 Ortiz, above n 15, 6. Although there has been a recent drive to untie aid, only a few donor countries such as Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom have fully untied their aid contributions.