Can insurance really make emergency aid better, faster, and fairer? That was the question we posed to the impressive panel that we convened last week in Nairobi at the second high level meetings of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation. The panel brought together two critical skills to improving emergency aid: development expertise and risk management nous, and we left with four strong takeaways.
CGD Policy Blogs
After Brexit, can the UK pursue its own national interest while still benefiting global development? A Global Skills Partnership (GSP) is a bilateral arrangement linking skill creation and skill mobility. The two countries participating in a Partnership craft a pre-migration agreement: targeting a specific skills gap, deciding how to allocate and finance training for potential migrants, and agreeing on employment terms and conditions for participants.
“Private sector” appears 18 times in the outcome document from last year’s UN financing for development conference in Addis Ababa—exactly the same number of times as “international cooperation.” In part, this is driven by the financial shortfall traditional donors face in delivering this ambitious agenda, and partly it reflects the different skills our public and private sectors possess. Now, one year into the SDGs, where are those ideas that bring private sector ingenuity and capital into achieving the development goals? In this edition of the CGD Podcast, we'll introduce you to one of them.
Philip Hammond, Chancellor of the Exchequer, has assured people that post-Brexit labour policy will be about the “cream of the crop,” making sure that high-skilled workers won’t face excessive red tape or heavy-handed visa rules if they want to work in the UK. The “migration problem,” in Hammond’s words, is not with “computer professors, brain surgeons, or senior managers.” A migration policy built on that creaky premise misses at least three key points: gains from trade, mutual productivity, and huge welfare gains.
Displacement can threaten regional stability. And it fuels divisive politics in countries that perceive themselves to be at risk of large inflows of refugees. So why is displacement still a tough, unchecked challenge? One major reason is that displacement isn’t—yet—a development problem.
Whatever you think about Brexit, it doesn’t make sense to secure Britain’s economic future by adding red tape. Theresa May’s government wants to tamp down net migration. That’s has opened space for some new self-defeating proposals.
“Private sector” appears 18 times in the outcome document from last year’s UN financing for development conference in Addis Ababa—exactly the same number of times as “international cooperation.” As we approach the first anniversary of the world signing up to the SDGs, where are the ideas that bring private sector ingenuity and capital to delivering them? In the coming weeks, we’re going to tell you about six.
“Cat” bonds are effectively a cheaper source of large-scale insurance coverage against clearly measured risks like earthquakes, storms, or even disease outbreaks. Generally, though, coverage hasn’t trickled down to the poorer and most at-risk countries—precisely those which are most vulnerable when aid fails to arrive or arrives piecemeal. Scaling up this market for lower-income countries would provide better shielding against many risks that undermine development overseas.
When a disaster strikes, we are urged to send money, and many people do—but is there a better way to fund the relief effort? My guests this week, DFID chief economist Stefan Dercon and CGD senior analyst Theo Talbot, believe that insurance can help.
Aid for countries after a disaster is rooted in our best impulses, but the way we provide it urgently needs to be reformed. We spend too little on reducing the costs of future disasters, aid shows up too late, and calls for reform are met with replies of “too bad” because the poorest people bear the greatest costs. But this is a problem that we can fix.