Many analysts argue that trade sanctions are ineffective because they generate incentives for evasion. Others object to them as hurting the population of the target country as much as its leaders. We argue that loan sanctions unlike trade sanctions may be self-enforcing, and that they help the population by protecting it from being saddled with “odious debt” run up by dictators to finance looting or repression. In particular, governments could impose sanctions by instituting legal changes that prevent seizure of a country’s assets for non-repayment of debt, if the debt was incurred after the sanction was imposed. This would reduce creditors’ incentive to extend loans to sanctioned regimes. However, decisions on whether assets can be seized to enforce debt repayment would be subject to bias if they were made ex post and the deciding body asymmetrically valued the welfare of debtor countries and their creditors. Restricting such decisions to cover only future lending would help avoid this time-consistency problem.

Rather than provide development assistance indefinitely, foreign aid donors increasingly seek to help communities sustainably provide local public goods themselves. We examine various strategies for sustainably fighting intestinal worms through voluntary local mobilization. Intestinal worms affect one in four people worldwide, but can be controlled by taking medicine twice annually. Since much of the resulting treatment benefit comes through reduced disease transmission, standard public finance analysis provides a rationale for subsidized treatment. Randomized evaluations suggest several efforts to replace subsidies with sustainable worm control measures were ineffective. A drug cost recovery program reduced take-up by 80%. A mobilization intervention designed to boost drug take up failed. Health education did not affect behavior. People were less likely to take drugs if randomly exposed to more information through their social network. In this context, using external interventions to promote sustainable voluntary provision of local public goods (like worm control) appears unrealistic.