Views from the Center
CGD experts offer ideas and analysis to improve international development policy. Also check out our Global Health blog and US Development Policy blog.
Linking Aid to Results: Why Are Some Development Workers Anxious? (Guest post by Owen Barder)
I am pleased to share with our readers at Owen’s request this discussion of Cash on Delivery Aid, which appeared yesterday on his blog, Owen Abroad.
Linking Aid to Results: Why Are Some Development Workers Anxious?
By Owen Barder
The Center for Global Development is working on an idea which they call Cash on Delivery aid, in which donors make a binding commitment to developing country governments to provide aid according to the outputs that the government delivers. I think this is a good idea in principle, and hope that it can be tested to see whether and how it could work in practice. The UK Conservative party have said in their Green Paper that if they are elected they will use Cash on Delivery to link aid to results.
Linking aid more closely to results is attractive from many different perspectives. My own view is that linking aid directly to results will help to change the politics of aid for donors. Many of the most egregiously ineffective behaviours in aid are a direct result of donors’ (very proper) need to show to their taxpayers how money has been used. Because traditional aid is not directly linked to results, donors end up focusing on inputs and micromanaging how aid is spent instead, with all the obvious consequences for transactions costs, poor alignment with developing countries systems and priorities and lack of harmonisation. If we could link aid more directly to results, I think donors will be freed from many of the political pressures they currently face to deliver aid badly; and it would be politically easier to defend large increases in aid budgets.
What Will Happen to British Development Policy If (When) the Tories Win Next Year?
In the UK, the Conservative Party is leading soundly in the polls and appears likely headed to win elections sometime next spring. What would a David Cameron-led government mean for British development policy--and especially the future of DFID?
What to Do with USAID? Lessons from Kabul
Very interesting op-ed in Sunday’s WashPost on U.S. efforts to promote health care in Afghanistan that cuts to the heart of the debate over integrating development into U.S. foreign policy. The authors, two noted health experts, claim that American programs have done immediate good: up to 100,000 infants and children have been saved from early death this year alone. Perhaps more importantly for the long-term:
On Nick Kristof, Helping the World’s Poor, and Big Aid
In a masterful essay this past Sunday on how we can help the world’s poor (that was the title), Nicholas Kristof managed to honor Jeff Sachs (“indefatigable”) and Bill Easterly (“powerful and provocative book”).
But he probably has set off another round of the “ferocious intellectual debate” between those two and their adherents. That’s because he didn’t really get to the question the ferocious debate is actually about.
South Korea Joins the Donor Club
The Korea Times reports that the Paris-based Development Assistance Committee is set to endorse South Korea's application for membership on Wednesday. DAC is the official club of Northern government donors. Korea will join Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, the U.S., Western European nations and the European Commission in one of the world's most exclusive clubs. Meanwhile, Korea and the U.N.
Major NGOs Comment on COD Aid
This is a joint post with Nancy Birdsall and Bill Savedoff.
During a panel discussion we hosted at the World Bank and IMF annual meetings in Istanbul last month on mutual accountability and outcomes in aid, Max Lawson from Oxfam, in referring to COD Aid, said that CGD appears to have more effective publicity strategies and reach than the European Commission. While we do have a (small but) stellar communications team, our ideas spread far primarily because other organizations are seriously engaged in exploring and debating new ideas like the ones we have proposed (otherwise our tiny team would be sleepless, to say the least!).
One case in point is the recent COD Aid briefing paper issued by the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development (CAFOD) – a large international development organization based in the UK which raises about 75% of its funds from individual supporters.
What's This About? Aid to Ethiopia? More Troops to Afghanistan? U.S. and Pakistan?
Before investigating the source of the below quote, read it and guess to what it refers – it might surprise you how broadly applicable it is.
It’s a classic American dilemma: How does a superpower fix problems in a faraway country without dictating policies in a way that ultimately enfeebles the very people we are trying to help?
Yes Bill, No Owen: Why I Still Doubt Aid-Growth Regressions
[Update: I posted slides from my turn as a discussant for this paper at the Brookings Institution on January 25, 2010.]
The Moyo Criterion: Is Easterly a Truer Scholar than the Gateses?
Yesterday, Bill Easterly and Laura Freschi took Bill and Melinda Gates to task for building an aid success story on dubious African malaria statistics.
Pages
Tags
- (-) Remove Aid Effectiveness filter Aid Effectiveness
- USAID (10) Apply USAID filter
- Cash on Delivery (7) Apply Cash on Delivery filter
- Global Health (5) Apply Global Health filter
- Capital Flows (4) Apply Capital Flows filter
- Corruption (4) Apply Corruption filter
- MCC (4) Apply MCC filter
- Security (4) Apply Security filter
- Africa (3) Apply Africa filter
- aid (3) Apply aid filter
- PEPFAR (3) Apply PEPFAR filter
- Trade (3) Apply Trade filter
- Asia (2) Apply Asia filter
- Commitment to Development Index (CDI) (2) Apply Commitment to Development Index (CDI) filter
- Economic Growth (2) Apply Economic Growth filter
- Education (2) Apply Education filter
- Evaluation (2) Apply Evaluation filter
- financial crises (2) Apply financial crises filter
- Fragile States (2) Apply Fragile States filter
- G20 (2) Apply G20 filter
- HIV/AIDS (2) Apply HIV/AIDS filter
- International Monetary Fund (2) Apply International Monetary Fund filter
- Latin America (2) Apply Latin America filter
- Poverty (2) Apply Poverty filter
- State Department (2) Apply State Department filter
- U.S. Presidential Elections (2) Apply U.S. Presidential Elections filter
- World Bank (2) Apply World Bank filter
- Climate Change (1) Apply Climate Change filter
- debt (1) Apply debt filter
- DFID (1) Apply DFID filter
- Environment (1) Apply Environment filter
- Food and Agriculture (1) Apply Food and Agriculture filter
- Food Security (1) Apply Food Security filter
- G8 (1) Apply G8 filter
- Global Warming (1) Apply Global Warming filter
- Globalization (1) Apply Globalization filter
- Governance/Democracy (1) Apply Governance/Democracy filter
- International Financial Institutions (1) Apply International Financial Institutions filter
- labor mobility (1) Apply labor mobility filter
- Middle East (1) Apply Middle East filter
- Millennium Development Goals (1) Apply Millennium Development Goals filter
- ODA (1) Apply ODA filter
- Pakistan (1) Apply Pakistan filter
- results (1) Apply results filter
- United Kingdom (1) Apply United Kingdom filter
- United Nations (1) Apply United Nations filter
- US President (1) Apply US President filter
- White House and the World (1) Apply White House and the World filter
Experts
By Date
- (-) Remove 2009 filter 2009
- December 2009 (4) Apply December 2009 filter
- November 2009 (5) Apply November 2009 filter
- October 2009 (6) Apply October 2009 filter
- September 2009 (1) Apply September 2009 filter
- August 2009 (3) Apply August 2009 filter
- July 2009 (7) Apply July 2009 filter
- June 2009 (3) Apply June 2009 filter
- May 2009 (1) Apply May 2009 filter
- April 2009 (7) Apply April 2009 filter
- March 2009 (4) Apply March 2009 filter
- February 2009 (3) Apply February 2009 filter
- January 2009 (2) Apply January 2009 filter
Commentary Menu