You are here
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:
Tags
- (-) Remove Aid Effectiveness filter Aid Effectiveness
- aid (1) Apply aid filter
- Asia (1) Apply Asia filter
- Cash on Delivery (1) Apply Cash on Delivery filter
- DFID (1) Apply DFID filter
- Education (1) Apply Education filter
- Evaluation (1) Apply Evaluation filter
- MCC (1) Apply MCC filter
- results (1) Apply results filter
- Security (1) Apply Security filter
- State Department (1) Apply State Department filter
- United Kingdom (1) Apply United Kingdom filter
- USAID (1) Apply USAID filter
- World Bank (1) Apply World Bank filter
Commentary Menu