Or the subject of 'Aid'

[the_future_modernes]

2009 The failed promise of aid in Africa: Review of Dead Aid and Ending Aid Dependence

Ama Biney reviews two recent books, united in their call for Africa’s disengagement from aid dependency, but with sharply contrasting ideological visions for how to do this and to what end: Dambisa Moyo’s Dead Aid Why Aid is Not Working and How There is Another Way for Africa and Yash Tandon’s Ending Aid Dependence.

What these two books have in common is firstly that they have exceptionally compelling titles for those interested in their subject matter. Secondly, is the obvious fact that they are concerned with aid and Africa. Thirdly, these books will interest those students, policymakers and government officials who ostensibly claim to be interested in eradicating aid. However, this is where their similarities end. The two authors have sharply contrasting ideological visions for Africa’s disengagement from aid dependency. This is indisputably on account of their backgrounds. Moyo has worked at the World Bank and Goldman Sachs, studied at Harvard and Oxford universities, whereas Tandon is a radical scholar, public intellectual and former director of the South Centre (an intergovernmental think tank of the developing countries). In other words, their different experiences not only inform their analysis of aid, but their wholly differing prescriptive solutions to Africa’s myriad problems, which they agree are rooted in aid dependency.

Both authors eloquently illustrate how aid has failed to deliver the promise of economic growth and poverty alleviation in Africa. Moyo’s caustic attack is greater than Tandon’s. She forcefully argues that not only has aid often been stolen by corrupt governments, it has often been unproductive; it has led to indebtedness and as President Paul Kagame of Rwanda poignantly states, since 1970, much of the US$300 billion allocated to Africa was spent on creating and sustaining client regimes of one type or another, with minimal regard to developmental outcomes on the continent (p. 27). Moyo claims that aid ‘is the silent killer of growth’ (p. 48). In chapter four she gives a cogent critique of the damaging effects of aid in that it reduces savings and investment as a result of the ‘crowding-out effect’ of aid; it discourages private finance capital; causes inflation; stifles the export sector and inculcates an aid dependent psychology in African people (pp.61-66).

On the other hand, Tandon’s ‘aid taxonomy’ is a far greater analytical breakdown of the five different types of aid, compared to Moyo’s simplistic three forms (humanitarian or emergency aid, charity aid and bilateral/multilateral forms of aid). Using a colour classification Tandon identifies purple aid as based on the principle of solidarity; green/blue aid encompasses humanitarian aid and transfer of technical assistance; yellow aid is given on the principle of geo-strategic and security interests; orange aid are concessionary grants given for commercial gain – and in Tandon’s opinion should not be considered as aid – and lastly red aid is given on the basis of ideological principle to influence countries to implement the policies of the Washington Consensus (pp. 18-22). Tandon contends that it is this latter aid that permeates and dominates the kinds of aid given by the DCD-DAC. MORE

2009 Why Aid to Africa must Stop

Interview with Dambisa Moyo (National Post)--Born and raised in Zambia but [raised eyebrow from me: why "but"? Shouldn't that be "and"?] educated at Oxford and Harvard, Dambisa Moyo was an uncommon face as a black woman in the world of high finance. Now with the publication of her book, Dead Aid, she has become an uncommon voice, a strong and eloquent advocate of stopping financial aid to Africa as the best way to help the troubled continent. It is an idea contradicting rock star campaigners, Western politicians, and grassroots wisdom all at once. As she makes her way to Canada for a highly anticipated debate on Monday with Stephen Lewis and others at the Munk Debate on Foreign Aid, she spoke with the National Post about her ideas and the hazards of opposing the aid orthodoxy.

Q. What’s so bad about rich nations sharing their wealth with poor nations 
to help them cope with their struggles?

A. No country on Earth has ever achieved long-term growth and reduced poverty in a meaningful way by relying on aid. It’s just never happened. So we’re pushing a strategy that has no evidence of working anywhere on Earth. And we have years of evidence that the aid strategy doesn’t work.

It boils down to incentive. We have to ask ourselves: Are African governments incentivised to do what governments all around the world are expected to do, that is, deliver public goods: education, health care, infrastructure and security? Unfortunately an aid system has allowed African governments to abdicate their responsibilities.... So until African governments live or die based on job creation and providing goods to Africans and not rely just on getting aid money, we will continue to see a situation where the private sector has not developed and Africans do not have job opportunities.

The billion dollars that go from government to government ... can make African governments lazy with respect to doing what they are supposed to be doing. It also fuels corruption, can fuel civil wars, inflation, the debt burden, and so on.
Q. What do you see as the better way?

A. It is a mixture of trade, foreign direct investment, capital markets, the bond market, remittance and microfinance. It is basically fostering a private sector investment into these economies so you actually get job creation. The fundamental problem with the aid model is there are no jobs being created for Africans. It is a band-aid solution. Over 60 per cent of Africa’s population is under the age of 24. These people need jobs, or we’ll have a continent of pirates or young people with no opportunities. It is critically important that people understand that Africans want what Westerners want. MORE

Ending aid dependence: Asserting national autonomy: Yash Tandon

PAMBAZUKA NEWS: Yash, how did you come to write 'Ending Aid Dependence?'

YASH TANDON: The book was written just before the September 2008 conference in Accra organised by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the World Bank on the Accra Action Agenda (AAA). The AAA was based on the OECD’s Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (PDAE). The PDAE, based on five principles, looked benign at first sight … until you began to analyse it in detail, looked at the fine print, and began to understand its implications. It was clear to me that hiding behind its benevolent exterior lay an insidious formula to subject aid-recipient poor countries to the collective discipline of the donors. Like colonialism that was sold to us as something ‘for our own good’ and in recent decades the ideology of globalisation and neoliberalism, the PDAE was packaged also as something ‘good’ for us, especially for Africa. As somebody said, I think it was Aristotle, there comes a time when out of a false good there arises a true evil. This is what the AAA was. So the aim of the book was to caution the developing countries against endorsing the AAA.

PAMBAZUKA NEWS: What were the biggest challenges in writing it?

YASH TANDON: The main challenge was twofold. The first was to meet the deadline of September 2008. I started writing the book in June 2008, and I was immensely relieved that I was able to finish and get it published just before the conference. The second challenge was to get the message across to the developing countries. The OECD and the World Bank could not be stopped, I am afraid, but I am pleased to say that once my book was in the hands of the delegates coming from the developing countries, many of them did begin to put to question the whole idea of ‘development aid’ as a genuine instrument of development.

PAMBAZUKA NEWS: The aid taxonomy that you have come up with is a useful tool with which to analyse aid and place it into categories. As you stated: ‘Aid can be placed in a continuum from left to right, starting with Purple Aid (based on the provision of global public goods), Yellow Aid (based on the principle of geopolitical strategic and security interests), Orange Aid (based on the commercial principle), and Red Aid (based on an ideological principle).’ How did you come up with these categories? Did the colour-coded work of the World Trade Organization (WTO) inspire you?

YASH TANDON: Actually not, there is very little inspiring about the WTO. Multilateral trade is important, of course, but the WTO is so deeply steeped in legitimising the outcome of asymmetrical power relations between the North and the South that it is the wrong instrument to advance the cause of multilateralism. No, I invented the colours myself. It wasn’t difficult. MORE

Humanitarian Aid 101: #1 – Aid cannot and will not fix anything

If I was to ever teach a course in humanitarian principles and action, it would go something like this:

Lesson #1. Aid cannot and will not fix anything.

One of the most important lessons that we’ve never really learned is that, in fact, aid does not fix anything. This is most likely a difficult one for you to wrap your head around. It certainly was for me, and I only managed it after of several years in the humanitarian aid world. Aid cannot and will not fix anything.

You wouldn’t know this from reading NGO promotional material. Actually, I would say that in general it is probably not a good idea to try to learn about or understand humanitarian work by reading stuff published by NGOs, because NGOs, for a long list of complicated reasons that I won’t go into right now, have very little (basically zero) motivation for telling anyone this particular truth. This particular truth being, specifically, that they cannot fix poverty. NGOs cannot eradicate hunger. NGOs cannot stop human trafficking. NGOs cannot and will not transform communities, empower the marginalized, stop climate change, or educate the global illiterate…

MORE