Reaction to the New Development Policy: The Good, The Bad, The Uncertain

Yesterday at the United Nations MDG Summit, President Obama announced the U.S. policy on global development. To be fair, the announcement of any new policy prompts more questions than answers.  Critics will focus on what’s been left out or what has not been sufficiently emphasized.  Sadly, many organizations may choose to view it through the lens of parochial interests rather than judging it on its prospects to reduce poverty and spur economic growth.  So let’s pause at the outset for a round of applause for the PSD team.

Here are the main takeaways as I see them:

• The Good:  We now have an official development policy to guide U.S. foreign assistance across all government agencies, one that sets objectives, clarifies approaches, and is results-oriented.
• The Bad:  The new policy will seemingly continue to rely on a gaggle (as in a disorderly group, not necessarily of geese) of government agencies to do development work.
• The Uncertain:  How will the policy be operationalized within agencies and in the field?  How will effective coordination among agencies be achieved, and who will be in charge of herding these cats?  What will “selectivity” look like from both a country and sector perspective?  The policy emphasizes the need for country buy-in; does it appreciate the need for congressional buy-in?  Will the policy, with its focus on recipient country policy reforms and commitment to development, apply to all countries, or will some strategic partners be treated differently?  Will the policy empower aid officials in the field to innovate and achieve results?  (These and many other topics are ripe for future posts, so stay tuned.)

There are many things to like in the policy --  aiming for sustainable development, enabling local entrepreneurship, public-private partnerships, being selective in what we do and where, country ownership, a division of labor among donors, and the renewed centrality of evaluations to guide investments.   The policy represents major progress in justifying and elevating development, even if it seems like it has taken ages to reach this point.However, the hard part of the exercise now begins – implementation.  Many good ideas have died in bureaucratic black holes.  Will the implementation be able to match the rhetoric?  Will turf battles trump good intentions?  Why, if the agencies had difficulties reaching agreement on important aspects of the development policy over the past year, should we now expect them to play nice in the implementation phase?But enough about what I think, take our poll and let us know your views!