Before leaving for August recess, Senators John Kerry, Marco Rubio, and Benjamin Cardin released the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review Act (S.3341), requiring a QDDR every four years. In theory, this bill makes good sense.
Last month, I released a new analysis on the Future of Aid Reform. In it, I sought to judge to what extent the administration’s 2012 budget request reflected a strong commitment to the principles outlined in the PPD and QDDR, and to prognosticate on the congressional response.
Back in July of last year, I blogged on five steps for a practical agenda on how to move beyond vision and “get on with it.” Since then, the President’s Global Development Policy and the first Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review were released. Some progress has been made
At the State Department, QDDR changes are about moving boxes in the org chart. State will put global economy and systems together (under Undersecretary Bob Hormats, apparently) and human security, conflict prevention and other good things together (under Undersecretary Maria Otero). Both moves seem reasonable – though it is mostly about insider DC top-down process which is hard for voters to wrap their heads around in the way of action or impact.
Regarding USAID, I sense QDDR change is more about reform and rebuilding.
On November 12th, my colleague Todd Moss devised a grading matrix for the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR). Now that the full document has been released, the two of us are donning our professors’ hats and reporting our final grades based on his original framework.
The early Christmas gift from the State Department of a 200+ page Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) was unwrapped several times over and inspected by its many recipients in the development and diplomacy communities. The “Made in DC” review is a 100% American product finely crafted by some of the best American women and men (see pages 214-215) in the U.S.G.
After nearly 18 months, thousands of man-hours, and a few interagency scuffles, the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review was released on Wednesday. First, hats off to the many State Department and USAID staff who toiled on the various working groups in addition to their regular work portfolios. This was a huge undertaking for which staff should be applauded.
Twas two weeks before Christmas, when all through the town
Breaths were held expectantly, in the midst of a countdown.
With their keyboards ready, the bloggers abandoned all care,
Hoping that Secretary Clinton soon would be there.
The NGOs were nestled all snug in their beds,
Knowing the QDDR soon would be read.
And the Senate and House, with a sharp rap,
Had just left town for a long winter’s nap.
When out on the Mall there arose such a clatter,
I am noting with some amusement that India is labeled "Borderline Unstable" on a map of fragile states, borrowed from Foreign Policy and the Fund for Peace, and asterisked with a "Not an official USG Product" (which I am not sure lets the State Department off the hook). Borderline unstable? Really QDDR?
This is what President Obama said on his recent trip to India when he addressed the U.S.-India Business Council:
With the unofficial release of a consultation document on the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR), we now have further indications of what will be in the final version scheduled for official release in December. Until we see the final product, it is difficult to know if some of the laudable rhetoric surrounding the role of development and USAID will be matched by the concrete steps needed to turn it into reality. As they say, the devil is in the details.