An Alternative Approach to International Development

that "facilitate" in #12 should be "facilitate and control".

The only significant departure from current goals in the proposed approach is I think the direct collection of revenues from each donor country by multilateral agencies. And I dont think any country is going to make such a commitment. No one today will argue against the role of the public sector in the economy being to facilitate investments by private sector.

Mr Gestsson,

I agree with you completely. Based on my experience of over 8 years working as a development finance professional, I think donor funding creates certain "perverse" incentive effects which cannot be captured in teh elegant economic models but can be expereinced first hand if you work in the area. The whole incentive structure in donor funded activities is skewed against development. I think there can never be development through the present "development industry".... the development pioneers throughtout the history have worked under an entrepreneurial spirit albeit of a social kind. That spirit cannot be replicated through the managerialism of the NGO.

Regards

A Khan
PhD (Economics) Student
Sydney

Chowk admin, good job. I revisited Chowk after a long time and I am glad to see articles of this nature.

Steini,

Thanks 4 the link. I shall get back to u after reading the 24-page link.

Re: # 1

I don't think that you understood the argument. It implies that politicians of donor nations are taking advantage of the system at the cost of the poor (the intended beneficiaries). It is suggesting that we should privatize foreign aid so that the objective of aid is realigned with the stated purpose of aid -- to promote and secure basic human rights.

If you were to read "Transforming the Aid Environment" you will most likely find yourself agreeing with my argument.

Re: #2

It's true that decolonization left Africa a geopolitical mess, but the redefinition of the borders dividing African nations is a tough starting point to a realistic discussion on the improvement of today's approaches to aid assistance.

I am suggesting that we should make aid apolitical. Stop channeling funds from governments to governments and empower the private sector in development. Which is a win-win transformation because the private sector is more efficient and governments do not have to adhere to conditions enforced by donor governments.

Please take a look at the argument http://aidmarket.info/AidMarket2007.pdf

You will see that I reason why the development effort ought to be more education-centered and how the monitoring and evaluation system could be partly integrated with local curriculum as a means to improve the quality of information.

I emphasize that the aid-curse is every bit as damaging as the natural-resources-curse...so called.

Also, how empowering the private sector is the best way in which to improve the efficacy of donated funds.

After you read it, I would be glad to discuss the matter in greater detail.

All the best,
Thorsteinn

#7 Posted by VRV,

No their concern was genuine, and it was evident from what they said after their last concert a couple of years ago.

They said every rich country makes commitments, but nothing comes through.

They just gave up.

Zee,

Those two singers were either part of British play for 50+ African votes for Olympics or they had sincerely felt for the poverty.

My hunch is that the dont speak abt poverty anymore, there4 the concern is phoney.

#2 Posted by VRV,

Bob Geldof and Bono learnt in due course what it was all about after decades of effort. They must be the two most bitterly disappointed people on the planet right now. What they tried to do was not possible.

#1 Posted by jayp,

Yaar actually you're smart if not for your anti-TNT stance ... :)

source of vitamin C

Re: # 2
I agree. US/UK have always lived and are living out of poor countries. The people in these countries knowingly or unknowingly supporting terrorism. Using force to cheat others is Terrorism.

The article is simple and direct. However the issue of development has its own share of politics. If we take Africa as proxy to the under-developed world the following reasons emerge:

1. If we look at Africa, it's the work of a cartographer i.e. the nations carved outta Africa are the nations the way the colonial powers wanted them (I guess the straight lines cant miss our eyes). So the nations are mostly the nations made by the west. Period. The ppl of Africa had no say in that aspect.

2. An oil producing nation like Nigeria imports the final products of crude oil!!!!!!!!!!!! So the value addition is accrued to the west and western companies. Colonial economic arrangements are still on :-(

3. Farmers paid for coffee beans in Kenya or any African nation is anything but meagre, whereas the companies like Nestle, Kenco etc., or the intermediaries (obviously owned by westerners) that sell final products get sooooooooo much as compared to what the farmer gets in Africa. Btw ppl in western countries cant live their lives without coffee but the farmers that supply coffee beans are not compensated adequately.

4. Africa produces abundant quantities of orange - the natural source of vitamin, important for every human being at least one orange a day - that's exported to the west and the west takes it for granted and I am sure that's not paid for adequately as well, whereas the natives of Africa hardly consume that fruit as part of their diet.

Africa produces everything that man needs/wants like gold, diamonds but none of those precious commodities are in the hands of natives/blacks of Africa.

If we skim the economic factors from political points, it's obvious that blacks/natives of Africa don’t control their resources. What a pity! West wants to throw some coins as charity @ low interest rates!!!!!!! I think that’s where these model emerge.

The 3 ways of approach as highlighted by the author sounds more like academic debate to alleviate poverty & that can at best sound like a token approach. If the west really wants them stand on their own, establish educational institutions in their midst apart from throwing some coins of charity, else they keep extending their begging bowl every time they feel hungry.

As an aside I shall highlight one incident of importance in 2005. Ppl in England raised the heat of his theme i.e. ‘make poverty history’ in Africa concerts. Icons like Bob Geldof and his ilk raised pitch till the voting for Olympic bids in Singapore is completed. Once the Olympics are awarded to London, everybody forgot ‘make poverty history’ theme. There’re no concerts now abt poverty or any sound abt that theme. So the west’s concern for poverty in phoney.

The same applies to the Middle-east peace and its oil.

Who are you thorstein, you have no clue about the developmental assistance reality. Nearly 70 percent of teh so called aid money comes back to the donor country with in 6 months of its dispersal.

Most of teh time the poor countries are left with educational material and production equipment not suitable for the environment. In teh last decade, the capital flows have been from the poor to teh rich, the repayments of the so called assistances given earlier.