Back to Index

A view of how aid might change
Robert Calderisi
Extracted from The Africa Report
October, 2006

WHY FOREIGN AID ISN'T WORKING
Inadequate foreign aid has not been the cause of Africa's problems. More important factors have been political oppression, a clash of values between donors and recipients, and an indifference to economics - which led to Africa's losing half its markets to other developing countries between 1970 and 1990. But to the extent that Western countries still have influence over events, the dwindling contribution of aid could be focused better.

CUT DIRECT AID TO INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES IN HALF
Contrary to conventional recommendations, direct foreign aid to most African countries should be reduced, not increased. Leaner budgets would be better managed. There would be greater competition for resources among nations and more time to select, prepare, and supervise projects in the few countries that meet stringent criteria. Some savings from direct country aid could be channeled to regional universities, infrastructure projects, agricultural research, and cross-boarder HIV/AIDS initiatives.

FOCUS DIRECT AID ON COUNTRIES SERIOUS ABOUT REDUCING POVERTY
Serious countries no longer need the close monitoring they have received until now; instead, they should be given more generous and flexible support. Governments that are indifferent to poverty and fail on other measures should not be helped at all. Strict conditions should apply to mid-way recipients.

ALL COUNTRIES SHOULD HOLD INTERNATIONALLY-SUPERVISED ELECTIONS
All African countries receiving assistance should meet minimum standards of open political debate and fair elections. International supervision of elections should be highly organized: election supervisors would have to give close attention to the preparation of voter registration lists and ensure that the opposition have access to state-owned media. Tyranny by aid recipients must be punished.

SUPERVISE THE RUNNING OF AFRICA'S SCHOOLS AND HIV/AIDS PROGRAMMES
Most officials involved in administration and teaching would stay in place, but they would be supervised by international personal - 100-150 per country - to prevent the siphoning off of funds and abuses at the local school level. Many expatriate Africans would undoubtedly be willing to return home for extended contracts on attractive salaries, to be part of such an enterprise. The goal would be to keep everyone of school age enrolled and improve the quality of teaching and learning. The fight against HIV/AIDS is also too important to leave to the whims of African governments. The scale of organization needed to provide information to vulnerable groups, and the logistic network required for storing and distributing pharmaceutical products, is without precedent for most countries.

MERGE THE WORLD BANK, IMF AND UNDP
The rivalry and conflicting objectives of the World Bank, IMF and UNDP have led to confusion in the advice they give to Africa. They have ignited unnecessary arguments, sometimes put ideology ahead of facts, wavered over prescriptions and dispersed resources too wide. A merger would combine the strengths of all three. At first, Africa would be only part of the body's overall mission; all developing countries would benefit from its more coherent services. Combining the three would also free up thousands of their staff. Instead of being administrators and researchers, they could become school inspectors and election observers.

Source - The Trouble with Africa (Why Foreign Aid Isn't Working) by Robert Calderisi (Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2006).

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP