Comments on the ODI blog are moderated. ODI will post as many of your comments as possible but we cannot guarantee to publish them all.
#
re: Beware the aid sceptics? @ Thursday, August 10, 2006 11:02 AM
Paolo
I was reading your article that you posted yesterday on the ODI website. Aid is a very controversial topic in International Development and certainly in the circles of academia. I am not proponent of aid either and I would therefore support the points that Ruth Lea puts forward.
I am working at World Relief Mozambique and given your experience in this country you will agree that this has been the case. Aid has actually led to increased dependency which many folk in Western circles fail to see. If African countries can improve their comparative advantage not based on multilateral and bilateral relations that are patronizing, this would signify the dawn of a new era. While aid is 'effectively' administered to be a tool to curb poverty and set impoverished societies on a trajectory of transformational development, you can agree that aid finances the spending habits of the so-called 'Middle Class' in Africa. Although we have seen a decrease in aid being given to NGOs as multilateral and bilateral institutions are focusing on giving aid to various government departments in Africa, staff in NGOs ask for lucrative salaries that in the end are a detriment to developmental initiatives.
I am strongly convinced that ideas work well in their original context, and bilateral and multilateral institutions that give aid do not give an African voice that can implement ideas. This is absurd and makes aid ineffective as Africans continue to be at the receiving end of aid policies. The challenge facing the post-Washington Consensus state in Africa is how to increase its capacity to deliver, and develop necessary technical expertisee using the already existing resources (both human and natural) that Africa is endowed with. This, in the 21st century can never be achieved by increasing aid to Africa. However this should not be done in a paradigm shift that seeks to divorce both multilateral and bilateral institutions, rather enhance dialogue to complement developmental plans on the continent.
#
re: Beware the aid sceptics? @ Friday, August 11, 2006 9:39 AM
We are very worried about this question in the West, does aid help, or does it hurt? Will aid fix the problems of poverty, or it will ensure that they are never fixed?
Most likely, the answer is that aid doesn't make very much difference at all. Average aid to Africa over the last fifty years has been about $10/person/year, so what were we expecting?
Certainly, aid projects have helped some poor people in some places, especially emergency aid, but it is more difficult to find aid projects that have actually brought poor people out of poverty. Likewise, a lot of aid money has enriched the elites of a lot of poor countries. But these were elites who were already rich and powerful, and would have enriched themselves at the cost of their country with or without the infusion of aid.
There is not a country that has escaped poverty because of aid. Those that have, have done so because they have invested in their people and implemented good policies. It is very ethnocentric for Westerners to think that the solution to global poverty lies in getting aid right - our interventions just aren't that important.
#
Response to Madalitso Phiri @ Saturday, August 12, 2006 12:05 PM
I actually mostly agree with your comments, Madalitso. I would not call myself a 'proponent of aid', but a 'proponent of aid reform'. In the current international scenario, aid is not likely to disappear, so the real challenge is to make it work better, and shift its focus from financing 'the spending habits of the African middle class' (although I think that's exagerated. Aid also finances lots of schools, roads and hospitals) to 'setting impoverished societies on a trajectory of transformational development', as you correctly say. Scaling up aid in its present form, I agree with you, is not likely to be very successful, and may even do more harm than good (the missing link to my Briefing Paper on absorptive capacity is http://www.odi.org.uk/publications/briefing/bp_may05_absorptive_capacity.pdf). Lack of coordination, promotion of blueprint approaches, unclear focus on results, and a tendency to only talk to governments are problems of the current aid regime that need to be addressed. But the aid system will hardly be able to reform itself. It's people like you and me, working from outside the system both at the global level and at the country level, in Mozambique, who can make a real difference, but making sure that our governments (both aid donors and aid recipients) use aid resources in the best possible way.
#
re: Beware the aid sceptics? @ Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:31 PM
What would You say if China wanted to give Public Aid to North Ireland but asked to be able (a) to give part of that aid directly to NGOs (b) to give the rest to the United Kingdom as far as UK buy Chinese products, technical and professional services (they even would send Chinese technicians for free) AND follow their "guidances".
The big problem with Public Aid is that We continue to deny their sovereignty to the receipient countries and we yet think it will work. Another problem is that we have created a hundred-headed Hydre. Some day a UN Agency publish a report, the other day another Agency publish something else that is saying almost the contrary. Not to talk about the labyrintic clan-oriented nomenclatura-dominated Development System. Even Bill Gates is in now.
And all together they have hundreds of receips. There are so many cooks, it is not a surprise that we have such a bad cake.
Welcome in the Marvelous World of the Aid Industry.
Is it not about time to fully respect the complete sovereignty of the countries we pretend to help?
The only conditionnality should be a true democracy. Stop helping, start being helpfull. As we say in French "L'Enfer est rempli de bonnes intentions".
#
re: Beware the aid sceptics? @ Tuesday, August 22, 2006 2:00 AM
The problem of foreign aid is as much with the recipients as with the dispensers. We need also a vigorous debate on whether the industry of aid agencies of the global north have become more aid dependant than its intended beneficiaries. We need a critical re-thinking of the entire supply chain of the aid business, and not just blame the end-users.
Any call of 'scaling back' foreign aid will undoubtedly hit the more vulnerable groups disproportionately hard.
In a Personal View in yesterday’s Daily Telegraph, Ruth Lea puts forward a series of arguments which will sound very familiar to people following the debates for and against foreign aid and its role in tackling global poverty and underdevelopment. What poor countries need, argues Lea, is less aid and a more business-friendly environment that will unleash their dormant entrepreneurship and economic potential. She claims that aid has failed to deliver, and in many cases does ‘more harm than good by propping up corrupt regimes, engendering aid dependency and, crucially, holding back the necessary internal reforms needed for businesses to thrive’.
Many of her remarks are, in my view, somewhat misplaced. While I would never claim that all aid is good, and I am often skeptical about the call for scaling it up substantially (see my Briefing Paper on scaling up and absorptive capacity), I think that the crucial point of the aid debate should not be about whether it has worked or not, but about how the way in which aid is given can be improved, along with our understanding of the ways in which it influences (or not) reform opportunities in poor countries.
First of all, we need to recognize that aid has changed dramatically since the end of the Cold War. While twenty years ago Mobutu and other African leaders could count on Western aid no matter how corrupt their regimes were, nowadays not only Zimbabwe, but also Chad, Uganda and Ethiopia see their aid cut as soon as the donor community has clear proof that the government is not serious about reducing poverty and respecting some basic rules of democracy.
Certainly the aid system can still improve a lot, as inefficiency and wastage abound, but blaming aid dependency for all of Africa’s woes is not correct. Are we sure that poor countries would be better off today had they received no aid flows in the past? In a paper reviewing 50 econometric studies, Mark McGillivray of WIDER shows that this is not the case, especially when recent aid flows are taken into account.
Moreover, the ‘business-friendly environment’ that Ruth Lea would like to see taking root is that same one that was being promoted by the World Bank and the IMF in the structural adjustment programmes that are partly blamed for Africa’s lagging economic growth. In this case, the failure of aid is not that of holding back the necessary internal reforms, but that of promoting the wrong kind of reforms, not adequate to the contexts in which they were being introduced (Bill Easterly, in his new book, has some interesting views on this). In my opinion, one of the reasons why aid has not been as effective as one would hope lies in the lack of sufficient appreciation, in the aid world, of the social and political dynamics that underpin developmental reforms in poor countries. Aid can, when soundly designed, support progressive reforms, but it cannot substitute for the lack of sufficient pressure from within society for the kinds of reforms that can allow for ‘people's entrepreneurial initiative to flourish and decent jobs to be created’.
Related projects
Making oil and gas work for inclusive development: lessons from the South May 2008 - June 2008
Results of PSIAs on Bank operations April 2008 - September 2008
Reviewing the Results of Poverty and Social Impact Analysis on Bank Operations and In-Country Policy Formulation April 2008 - September 2008
2008 Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration March 2008 - December 2008
2007 Pakistan National Survey of HIV & STIs March 2008 - April 2008
Aid for Trade: Promoting Inclusive Growth March 2008 - September 2009
Innocenti Child Rights March 2008 - September 2008
PRS Training 2008 March 2008 - December 2008
Political Diagnostics and Growth February 2008 - March 2008
PFM Training Maputo February 2008 - February 2008
Study on Aid Instruments in Fragile States February 2008 - April 2008
GAVI Alliance Gender Policy Development January 2008 - June 2008
Millennium Villages Project Review January 2008 - December 2008
2008 Progress Report on the Paris Declaration January 2008 - March 2008
Backstopping support to SDC 2008 January 2008 - December 2008
Mutual Accountability Concept Note January 2008 - November 2008
Educational Support Programme (EMMME) December 2007 - January 2008
Background paper for 2008 Commonwealth Conference of Auditors General December 2007 - May 2008
Country Governance Analysis Policy Review December 2007 - March 2008
Approaches to assessing multilateral performance December 2007 - January 2008
DFID Human Rights Practice Review December 2007 - March 2008
Human Rights Practice Review December 2007 - March 2008
Learning Event on Promoting Pro-Poor Growth December 2007 - December 2007
Review of Global Health Partnerships December 2007 - March 2008
Trade Policy, Trade and Investment Promotion November 2007 - February 2008
HIV AIDS Education Communications Strategy - Tanzania Workshop November 2007 - December 2007
Study on social protection and children in West and Central Africa November 2007 - September 2008
Synergy between bilateral and multilateral activities November 2007 - January 2008
Fragile State Analysis and Baseline October 2007 - January 2008
World Bank Guidance Note on PRS / Budget Links October 2007 - December 2007
Parliamentary strengthening case studies October 2007 - April 2008
Tanzania Scenario Analysis September 2007 - December 2007
China in Africa September 2007 - March 2008
Policy coherence for Development: Synthesis Report September 2007 - January 2008
Sindh Education Reform Programme August 2007 - February 2012
Wilton Park Democracy Papers August 2007 - September 2007
Commitment to Development Index Launch August 2007 - December 2007
Funding Sources of UN Agencies in Malawi August 2007 - September 2007
Quality of Aid - advisor to CGD August 2007 - January 2008
Policy Paper on taxation and accountability July 2007 - October 2007
Africa Power & Politics Programme (APPP) July 2007 - June 2012
Budget Support, Aid Instruments and the Environment - The country context July 2007 - February 2008
Design of a Climate Change Innovation Programme (CCIP) for India July 2007 - December 2007
Spatial disparities and development policy June 2007 - November 2007
EUROsociAL June 2007 - December 2007
SPA Budget Support Surveys 2007 and 2008 June 2007 - March 2009
Joint Learning Programme on SWAps: Cambodia June 2007 - August 2007
Mapping the Global Partnership for Development: Country-level mappings of global issues, external policies and country contexts. June 2007 - March 2008
Norad Country Evaluation – Zambia June 2007 - August 2007
Irish Aid Selection of 10th Programme Country - Statistical Indicators May 2007 - June 2007
Facilitator CAPS Results Framework May 2007 - May 2007
Analytical Paper on State-Building May 2007 - July 2007
Project Completion Reports for DFID Budget Support Programmes 04/05 and 05/06 May 2007 - May 2007
Assessment of Paris Baseline Survey Findings May 2007 - June 2007
Re-thinking aid policy in response to Zimbabwe's protracted crisis May 2007 - June 2007
UNCT Rwanda Liaison May 2007 - June 2007
Scoping DFID's Policy on Human Rights April 2007 - October 2007
Strengthening Public Expediture Management in Bosnia and Herzegovina April 2007 - June 2007
Short Term Consultancy for Strategic Conflict Assessment April 2007 - May 2007
2007 Annual Report on the Results and Impact of IFAD Operations April 2007 - September 2007
Application of the Performance Based Allocation (PBA) System to Fragile States April 2007 - June 2007
EU Aid Effectiveness April 2007 - June 2007
ODI/AAPPG Meetings Series: Parliaments and Development April 2007 - May 2007
Strategic Governance and Corruption Assessments April 2007 - March 2009
Nepal Participatory Poverty Assessment March 2007 - June 2007
# re: Beware the aid sceptics? @ Thursday, August 10, 2006 11:02 AM
PaoloI was reading your article that you posted yesterday on the ODI website. Aid is a very controversial topic in International Development and certainly in the circles of academia. I am not proponent of aid either and I would therefore support the points that Ruth Lea puts forward.
I am working at World Relief Mozambique and given your experience in this country you will agree that this has been the case. Aid has actually led to increased dependency which many folk in Western circles fail to see. If African countries can improve their comparative advantage not based on multilateral and bilateral relations that are patronizing, this would signify the dawn of a new era. While aid is 'effectively' administered to be a tool to curb poverty and set impoverished societies on a trajectory of transformational development, you can agree that aid finances the spending habits of the so-called 'Middle Class' in Africa. Although we have seen a decrease in aid being given to NGOs as multilateral and bilateral institutions are focusing on giving aid to various government departments in Africa, staff in NGOs ask for lucrative salaries that in the end are a detriment to developmental initiatives.
I am strongly convinced that ideas work well in their original context, and bilateral and multilateral institutions that give aid do not give an African voice that can implement ideas. This is absurd and makes aid ineffective as Africans continue to be at the receiving end of aid policies. The challenge facing the post-Washington Consensus state in Africa is how to increase its capacity to deliver, and develop necessary technical expertisee using the already existing resources (both human and natural) that Africa is endowed with. This, in the 21st century can never be achieved by increasing aid to Africa. However this should not be done in a paradigm shift that seeks to divorce both multilateral and bilateral institutions, rather enhance dialogue to complement developmental plans on the continent.
Kind regards
Madalitso Phiri
Madalitso Phiri
# re: Beware the aid sceptics? @ Friday, August 11, 2006 9:39 AM
We are very worried about this question in the West, does aid help, or does it hurt? Will aid fix the problems of poverty, or it will ensure that they are never fixed?Most likely, the answer is that aid doesn't make very much difference at all. Average aid to Africa over the last fifty years has been about $10/person/year, so what were we expecting?
Certainly, aid projects have helped some poor people in some places, especially emergency aid, but it is more difficult to find aid projects that have actually brought poor people out of poverty. Likewise, a lot of aid money has enriched the elites of a lot of poor countries. But these were elites who were already rich and powerful, and would have enriched themselves at the cost of their country with or without the infusion of aid.
There is not a country that has escaped poverty because of aid. Those that have, have done so because they have invested in their people and implemented good policies. It is very ethnocentric for Westerners to think that the solution to global poverty lies in getting aid right - our interventions just aren't that important.
Paul
# Response to Madalitso Phiri @ Saturday, August 12, 2006 12:05 PM
I actually mostly agree with your comments, Madalitso. I would not call myself a 'proponent of aid', but a 'proponent of aid reform'. In the current international scenario, aid is not likely to disappear, so the real challenge is to make it work better, and shift its focus from financing 'the spending habits of the African middle class' (although I think that's exagerated. Aid also finances lots of schools, roads and hospitals) to 'setting impoverished societies on a trajectory of transformational development', as you correctly say. Scaling up aid in its present form, I agree with you, is not likely to be very successful, and may even do more harm than good (the missing link to my Briefing Paper on absorptive capacity is http://www.odi.org.uk/publications/briefing/bp_may05_absorptive_capacity.pdf). Lack of coordination, promotion of blueprint approaches, unclear focus on results, and a tendency to only talk to governments are problems of the current aid regime that need to be addressed. But the aid system will hardly be able to reform itself. It's people like you and me, working from outside the system both at the global level and at the country level, in Mozambique, who can make a real difference, but making sure that our governments (both aid donors and aid recipients) use aid resources in the best possible way.Paolo de Renzio
# re: Beware the aid sceptics? @ Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:31 PM
What would You say if China wanted to give Public Aid to North Ireland but asked to be able (a) to give part of that aid directly to NGOs (b) to give the rest to the United Kingdom as far as UK buy Chinese products, technical and professional services (they even would send Chinese technicians for free) AND follow their "guidances".The big problem with Public Aid is that We continue to deny their sovereignty to the receipient countries and we yet think it will work. Another problem is that we have created a hundred-headed Hydre. Some day a UN Agency publish a report, the other day another Agency publish something else that is saying almost the contrary. Not to talk about the labyrintic clan-oriented nomenclatura-dominated Development System. Even Bill Gates is in now.
And all together they have hundreds of receips. There are so many cooks, it is not a surprise that we have such a bad cake.
Welcome in the Marvelous World of the Aid Industry.
Is it not about time to fully respect the complete sovereignty of the countries we pretend to help?
The only conditionnality should be a true democracy. Stop helping, start being helpfull. As we say in French "L'Enfer est rempli de bonnes intentions".
Michel Monette
# re: Beware the aid sceptics? @ Tuesday, August 22, 2006 2:00 AM
The problem of foreign aid is as much with the recipients as with the dispensers. We need also a vigorous debate on whether the industry of aid agencies of the global north have become more aid dependant than its intended beneficiaries. We need a critical re-thinking of the entire supply chain of the aid business, and not just blame the end-users.Any call of 'scaling back' foreign aid will undoubtedly hit the more vulnerable groups disproportionately hard.
New York
Tamo Chattopadhay