The warring factions in global development

More and more we see two maybe three different sets of methods of global development waring against each other. China, the west, and sometimes Brazil fight to prove who is doing the most good.

China will help countries develop as long as they get something in return. The West demands changes to other countries so their markets will soon see something in return. While Brazil seems intent on showing other nations what has worked for them. They are new to this process, so we have yet to see what they will get in return.

We see this contrast in a big way in the country of Angola. China develops fast, yet few
Angolans are pleased with their work. Brazil cooperates with the Angolan people on development, yet it makes it harder for them to do it on their own. Inter Press Service writer Mario Osava gives us this on the ground viewpoint. 

Today, 35 years later, it is the excesses and glaring contrasts that shock the visitor to this city in southwestern Africa. Shiny new cars on brand-new roads and highways lined by thousands of still-empty or half-built office buildings, apartment blocks and residential towers stand in sharp contrast to the sprawling slums around the city.

Signs on construction sites written in Chinese clearly reflect the Asian giant’s high level of participation in the construction of today’s new Angola.

The most ambitious project carried out by companies from China is the Nova Cidade de Kilamba (Kilamba New City), a huge development designed to house half a million people, 20 km south of downtown Luanda.

When it is completed, the new neighbourhood will have more than 80,000 apartments built for large families – the norm in Angola – in buildings five to 13 storeys high. The development is also to be fitted out with dozens of schools, child care centres, health clinics and shops.

Nearly one-quarter of the buildings have been completed. But almost all of them are empty, even though more than 3,000 apartments were already available when the development was inaugurated in July 2011.

Also involved in building the new city are Brazilian firms, especially construction giant Odebrecht, which is in charge of key projects like electricity and water grids and the construction of roads.

The foreign presence in the massive new developments “is not something to be admired, because it shows that there are no national companies with the capacity to build them,” said one of Angola’s most prominent writers, Artur Pestana, better known as Pepetela, who is also a professor of sociology.

“The Chinese build faster, they work round-the-clock shifts, and they offer almost interest-free long-term loans,” he said. But they employ few Angolan workers and “there are many complaints about the quality of their construction work,” he added.

Meanwhile, Brazilian companies “apparently learned their lesson from a few initial fiascos which made them the butt of national jokes, and they now stand out for the quality of their work,” which enables them to compete with the Chinese, said the author, who has published many historical novels that are critical of the government of José Eduardo dos Santos, president since 1979.

...

It was the first non-oil company from Brazil to begin to operate in Angola with a “long-term outlook,” said Victor Fontes, director general of the Angolan company Elektra, which specialises in power and water grids. He said this had the positive effect of attracting other firms also interested in the long haul, instead of just short-term opportunities.

The director of institutional relations at Odebrecht Angola, Alexandre Assaf, told IPS that the consortium is committed to “continuity” in Angola, above and beyond the effects of wars or the global economic crisis.

Five years ago, only nine percent of the “strategic posts” in the company were held by Angolans – a proportion that has risen to 41 percent, he noted, to illustrate the company’s commitment to local development.

"Development is essentially amoral"

Jonathan Gleenie has posted a very controversial essay for the Guardian's Poverty Matters blog that contains the above statement. Glennie addresses what happens when a country moves up the economic ladder but does so at the expanse of human rights. The county Glennie uses as an example is Colombia, where former president Alvaro Uribe Vélez moved businesses into areas where people had to flee because of the threat of violence.

Imagine a situation in which millions of people are displaced from their land by violence or the threat of violence. The land is taken over by businesses that develop mega plantations to produce bananas, palm oil, or, yes, coca. Jungle is cleared for cattle rearing. Mines are dug to extract copper, gold, emeralds or oil. The manufacturing sector, which creates jobs and strengthens the middle class, fails to advance while resource extraction and export, which employs very few and fills the pockets of the wealthy, is the key plank of development strategy.

Private investment flows in, which some analysts think is vital for development. Exports lead to economic growth, which many commentators seem to think is synonymous with development. Meanwhile, as human rights are ignored in order to quell social conflict, claims are made that the state finally controls its territory. An ex-president begins a world tour to explain how he did it.

So what happens to the displaced rural communities? Some are wiped out, especially the indigenous groups, who slowly become extinct. Others go to towns and cities, where they have no cultural or political identity, and may live in misery or are dependent on others. Ironically, they often have better access to basic healthcare and education, which are more prevalent in urban areas. And their incomes may increase, as they join the labour market rather than depend on the land. Of course, as the cost of living is higher, they are in truth poorer - but the statistics that make up MDG1 look rosy.

Crucially, the children of internally displaced people, like the children of refugees, may do much better than their parents. In a sense, then, development is taking place, because the next generation is better off according to basic development indicators.

The model of development I'm sketching here is, in my view, the one Uribe chose, and which his successor, Juan Manuel Santos, is continuing. It is a caricature, of course, and the reality is far more complicated. For example, the urban security achieved by Uribe has indeed led to increased investment and tourism, which is important. A balanced assessment of his time in office needs to acknowledge some steps forward.

But Colombia is fundamentally an example of how development can be unethical. Millions have been displaced, thousands killed, tribes wiped out, all in the name of development. Development can be carried out with justice, respect and dignity for the poor. Or it can be carried out with violence, displacement and the suppression of human rights. Development indicators can be met with a focus on jobs and equality or, bypassing these, with patriarchal handouts and the delivery of basic services without affecting fundamental power relations.

Small development projects funded by middle income countries

The middle income countries of India, South Africa and Brazil have a joint international development fund to help fund projects for even poorer nations. The annual budget for this fund is only three million dollars. Due to the small budget, the IBSA Fund really tries to make the most of it's development dollar. Total budgets for most projects stay right around a half a million dollars. With US Aid and the Gates Foundation doing a lot of talk about funding projects the bring the most value form their money, there might be some lessons found within the IBSA Fund.

From the IPS, writer Marina Penderis gives us a few examples of projects funded by the IBSA.

The neighbourhood of Carrefour Feuilles in Haiti's capital, Port-au-Prince, has a history of violent gang conflict. In 2006 clashing members of that community were brought together through a waste collection and recycling scheme.

The budget for the initial 14-month project – one of the first supported by the IBSA Fund – was only 550,000 dollars, but IBSA is proud of the return on its investment.

The venture generates employment, reduces incidence of disease, prevents flood risk from garbage-clogged canals and, by recycling paper products into cooking bricks, even has a green effect. IBSA says it also has reduced violence in Carrefour Feuilles – and states that as being the main purpose of the project.

"The project provides a structure for people, who are traditionally from rival groups, to work together," explains Fernando Sena from the Brazilian Embassy in South Africa in an interview with IPS. "It employs 385 neighbourhood residents, including 207 women. Now 150,000 people benefit from improved sanitation."

The Carrefour Feuilles solid waste initiative was renewed after its initial run.

"The earthquake (that hit Haiti in 2010) didn't stop the project," says Sena. "And a study has been done to replicate it in East Timor."

Simultaneous to the first phase of the Haiti project, the IBSA Fund also started working with tiny West African state Guinea-Bissau's ministry of agriculture to train over 4,500 farmers (half of them women) in improved techniques of rice cultivation and citrus fruit and mango production, including in the monsoon-like rainy season. The budget for the first phase of this initiative was 498,750 dollars.

"This project is already in phase two and expanding to more villages," says Sena. "The idea is that the project will also provide solar energy equipment to five villages."

Video: Renewed hope over Isiolo-Moyale road

From NTV Kenya, a video on a new paved road that hopes to improve development into northern Kenya.

Developing the private sector for developing the world

More and more people involved in international development are realizing that the private sector and business should play a big role. Governments and donor aid agencies have avoided working with business in the past, but it is jobs that the poor need and always ask for.

From this essay that we found in the Guardian, writer Zahid Torres-Rahman from Business Action for Africa talks about the need for busineeses to be involved in development.

And it is when we think about what will drive development in a truly long-term way, that it becomes clearly important to focus on enterprise, jobs and economic opportunity. Ask a poor person what they see as their exit strategy from poverty, and they reply growing their business or getting a job. Two successive surveys of over 60,000 poor people by the World Bank have clearly demonstrated that.

As a result, DFID – and many other donor agencies around the world, 11 of which have released a statement (PDF) – are starting to think more constructively and creatively about how they can harness the private sector for development impact, and to generate the millions of jobs needed in developing countries. The same goes for a growing number of civil society organisations, such as Oxfam and Care, both of which have dedicated teams looking at how to partner with business.

This includes helping small businesses to grow and small-holder farmers to earn a more stable living. But it also includes engaging with large corporates – both international and national – from which much of the development community have instinctively shied. Yet it is in this area of big business engagement that much of the most innovative and promising solutions are emerging.

Best of all, these are not solutions being driven by "corporate social responsibility" or philanthropy, but by business sense and commercial opportunity – which makes them intrinsically sustainable and scalable.

The Business Call to Action, housed at the UN, provides some inspiring examples of companies having an impact through business models that create opportunities for poor people – as employees, suppliers, distributors or customers. To date, according to Helen Clark, head of the United Nations Development Programme, companies that have made commitments under the Business Call to Action will bring access to affordable IT, finance, healthcare and agricultural goods and services to over 10 million people, as well as jobs for nearly 40,000 people and better livelihoods for hundreds and thousands of farmers in Africa and India.

Golfing in Sudan

A new golf course has opened up in the most unlikely place... Sudan. The golf course is placed in a country with poverty stricken slums, and a bloody conflict in Darfur. It raises some ethical questions of use of water and inequality. But the people who built it say it's another score for development in Sudan.

From CNN, we are introduced the course developer and hear both sides of the debate.

Soba is the latest creation from Swiss architect Peter Harradine and his company Harradine Golf, an organization started by Harradine's grandfather in 1929.

Since taking the reins, he has been responsible for building golf courses in some of the most dangerous locations on the planet. It seems, after a war ends and a cease fire is announced, local developers reach for his number.

"I get contacted by all sorts of different people," he told CNN. "I am based in Dubai, as are a lot of investors who use Dubai as a hub. So I have had calls from [places like] Georgia, Tunisia and, of course, Sudan, but I'm not consciously waiting for wars to end!"
...

Yet it is his course in Sudan that has been the most surprising, not to mention controversial. Harradine was contracted by a local conglomerate to satisfy the demand created by Sudan's booming, oil-fueled economy.

According to the IMF, Sudan's GDP grew an average of eight percent year-on-year between 2004 and 2008. "There are a lot of rich people in Khartoum," Harradine told CNN.

But not everyone is happy with the global spread of golf. According to some, the building of golf courses in some parts of the world, especially in areas where clean drinking water is at a premium, raises some huge ethical issues.

UNESCO's first World Water Development Report said an 18-hole golf course can use as much as 2.3 million liters of water every day. The UK-based NGO Water Aid estimates that 66 percent of Sudanese, more than 25 million people, do not have access to clean water.

"We are not here to tell the Sudanese they can or cannot have a golf course but I'd be very surprised if the economic benefits will help the communities that live cheek by jowl with it," explained Water Aid's Oliver Cumming.
...

But Harradine sees the golf course as a chance to spread the game he loves whilst boosting the local economy at the same time. "I never go into politics, but I love golf and everyone should play golf," he said.

"I've never had any problem moving around Sudan. We had more problems finding the right sand for the root mixture and the right raw material. It's the technical issues, especially when there's an embargo, like bringing in brand new Caterpillars, but we got them. You read a lot in the papers that is bull***t. Who's right, who's wrong?

"During the construction we employed 200 people from the neighboring shacks," he continued. "They all had work, plus the security. A lot of people are learning how to maintain a golf course and each player has a local caddie. So these guys will all become players. In the beginning the richer clients profit, but in the end it trickles down to the normal guy."

Lead poisoning in rural Northern China

300 children in Northern China have suffered lead poisoning. The cause of the poisoning is said to be from inhaling the fumes of a factory close by.

Many areas in rural China have high polluting factories in an effort to bring development and jobs to the region. In some cases, China has put regulations on polluting and other safety measures aside in order to speed development in the country.

From the The Daily Star, this AFP story tells us what is being released from China's state media on the subject.

The children, all living alongside the Changqing industrial park in Fengxiang county, Shaanxi province, were found to have as much as twice the safe level of lead in their blood, the China Daily said.

They sleep more than before, cannot concentrate and react very slowly, the report said, citing local residents.

Normal lead content in the blood is below 100 milligrams per litre, and above 200 milligrams is considered hazardous, but the lead in some of the youngsters' blood was more than 250 milligrams per litre, it said.

Local residents believe that the Shaanxi Dongling Lead and Zinc Smelting Factory, only about 500 metres (yards) from their homes, was to blame for the poisoning, the paper said.

The factory had been required to help relocate nearby residents, but so far only 100 out of nearly 600 households had been able to move, as most villagers lacked the money for new homes, the paper said.

An uncertain view of Indian development

Writer Akash Kapur grew up in rural India, and has seen many changes in his area with the growth of development in the country. But when he is asked about what he thinks of the growth, he's uncertain if it's good or bad. Along the development, resentment and violence has also been introduced into Kapur's homeland.

From Kapur's latest column for the New York Times, he describes some of what he has seen.

But development has also disrupted existing ways of living. It has strained the social and cultural fabric of the villages. Kuilapalayam, a village at the head of the road leading to the beach, has had at least seven murders in recent years. Gangs of young men roam the village, extorting money, exacting revenge. Once, the panchayat, a traditional assembly made up of village elders, would have controlled the violence. But the new generation has modern ideas; they don’t heed their elders, and the panchayat members are powerless, too scared to step in.

Development has led to new resentments and torn apart families. Farmers who used to toil over barren patches of land suddenly find that that land is worth a small fortune. They’ve built new houses, sent their kids to school, bought motorcycles and maybe even cars. A couple of universities up the road have widened people’s horizons.

But neighbors who didn’t own land, who watched their friends get rich, often don’t feel quite as sanguine about the changes. And long-forgotten relatives have appeared, perhaps returning from the cities to make a claim on the land. The papers are full of often violent stories about disputes over property.

A real estate contractor I know grew up in one of the villages around here. He started when he was 16, a dropout from school, as a helper on construction sites. He now has 75 people working for him. He has built mansions for the newly rich, and even a couple of beach resorts.

He told me recently about his hopes for his children. His eldest son wants to be a doctor; his middle boy plans to be an aeronautics engineer; and his daughter wants to be a teacher. He’s excited for their futures, happy to know they won’t have to leave the country to build better lives.

But he told me, too, about his fears. He worries about the violence in the villages; he won’t let his son go to school alone. He’s concerned, also, because his son refuses to go to the temple. He knows that his children will probably move to the cities. That makes him sad. He feels they’ll lose their sense of community.

The need to develop for the youth in Timor-Leste

The country of Timor-Leste has a very young population. Much of that population doesn't have much to do because jobs are scarce. Many youth join street gangs, or the youth who want to stay off the streets turn to martial arts groups, but even some of those groups have bad elements.

From the IRIN, we hear from a leader of a youth group in Timor-Leste who has over 20,000 members.

Disenchantment among young people who fought for independence during Timor-Leste's resistance years could lead to unrest if they are not included in the country's development process, analysts warned.

"They feel their existence is not relevant any more in this independence era," said Ozorio Leque, 28, leader of Colimau 2000 - a youth group set up by activists during the Indonesian occupation of Timor-Leste.

A large number of disenfranchised youth are dissatisfied with high unemployment, low wages and lack of access to education, with only 27 percent completing secondary school. The World Bank estimates that by next year nearly 40 percent of the population will be between 15 and 29 years old.

Many turn to martial arts groups, with as many as 20,000 registered and 90,000 unregistered members.

"There is an assumption that when you join a group, you will be protected. The other reason is that most of the younger generation lack skills and knowledge so they take whatever they can get," said Leque.

About half the 1.1 million population lives below the poverty line. In Dili, unemployment is as high as 62 percent among those aged 15 to 19, while eight out of 10 young people engage in subsistence activities.

Leque, who claims that Colimau 2000 has more than 20,000 members, is due at Dili District Court on 22 June to be tried for crimes related to events in 2006.

On 28 April 2006, he launched a verbal tirade against the government before a mob attacked the government palace and destroyed state vehicles.

How to truly fight al-Qaeda

In his latest commentary, Jeffrey Sachs explains how a peaceful foreign policy is preferable to a violent one. Especially in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where development could do a lot more to defeat al-Qaeda than doubling military force.

We found the commentary in Today's Zaman from Turkey. Although it's not included in our snippet, Sachs also has stats on military spending compared to other areas of spending in the U.S. budget.

American foreign policy has failed in recent years mainly because the United States relied on military force to address problems that demand development assistance and diplomacy.

Young men become fighters in places like Sudan, Somalia, Pakistan and Afghanistan because they lack gainful employment. Extreme ideologies influence people when they can't feed their families and when lack of access to family planning leads to an unwanted population explosion. US President Barack Obama has raised hopes for a new strategy, but so far the forces of continuity in US policy are dominating the forces of change.
...

Both Afghanistan and the neighboring provinces of Pakistan are impoverished regions, with vast unemployment, bulging youth populations, prolonged droughts, widespread hunger and pervasive economic deprivation. It is easy for the Taliban and al-Qaeda to mobilize fighters under such conditions.

The problem is that a US military response is essentially useless under these conditions and can easily inflame the situation rather than resolve it. Among other problems, the US relies heavily on drones and bombers, leading to a high civilian death toll, which is inflaming public attitudes against the US. After one recent disaster, in which more than 100 civilians died, the Pentagon immediately insisted that such bombing operations would continue. A recent survey showed overwhelming Pakistani opposition to US military incursions into their country.

Obama is doubling down in Afghanistan, by raising the number of US troops from 38,000 to 68,000 and perhaps more later. There are also risks that the US will get involved much more heavily in the fighting in Pakistan. The new US commanding general in Afghanistan is reportedly a specialist in “counter-insurgency,” which could well involve surreptitious engagement by US operatives in Pakistan. If so, the results could prove catastrophic, leading to a spreading war in an unstable country of 180 million people.

What is disconcerting, however, is not only the relentless financing and spread of war, but also the lack of an alternative US strategy. Obama and his top advisers have spoken regularly about the need to address the underlying sources of conflict, including poverty and unemployment. A few billion dollars has been recommended to fund economic aid for Afghanistan and Pakistan. But this remains a small amount compared to military outlays, and an overarching framework to support economic development is missing.

Before investing hundreds of billions of dollars more in failing military operations, the Obama administration should rethink its policy and lay out a viable strategy to US citizens and the world. It's high time for a strategy of peace through sustainable development -- including investments in health, education, livelihoods, water and sanitation and irrigation -- in today's hotspots, starting with Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Such a strategy cannot simply emerge as a byproduct of US military campaigns. Rather, it will have to be developed proactively, with a sense of urgency and in close partnership with the affected countries and the communities within them. A shift in focus to economic development will save a vast number of lives and convert the unthinkably large economic costs of war into economic benefits through development. Obama must act before today's crisis explodes into an even larger disaster.

Big Farms the next step in development for Africa?

As you might tell, we are running way behind today. Our house was without electricity this morning, and I've been invited out tonight, so we apologize for the lack of posts today.

A great article in the Guardian examines if big farms are a possibly for African development. As a part of the Guardian's 'Katine Project" series, writer Anne Perkins weighs the options.

An economist like Paul Collier is convinced that radical steps have to be taken. "African peasant agriculture has fallen further and further behind the advancing commercial productivity frontier," he wrote at the end of last year in the journal Foreign Affairs. "Based on present trends, the region's food imports are projected to double over the next quarter century." Only large scale farms, he argues, are capable of providing the investment and market access that is essential to produce the surge in food production necessary to keep up with demand.

Rubbish, says development expert Steve Wiggins. "Yes, he is correct to emphasise the need for commercial farming. But no, he is wrong to imagine that this requires doing so on a large scale. His solution is unnecessary, flies in the face of history and carries important dangers."

The Guardian's partner in the Katine project, FarmAfrica, would agree. They lined up with the International Food Production Research Institute (IFPRI) at an international conference organised by the ODI three years ago. Its findings were reviewed recently in a discussion paper where the IFPRI called for African governments to prioritise support for small farms while developing exit routes for those whose land is swallowed up by more successful neighbours.

Unlike the Collier cry for rapid commercial development, their emphasis is on organic growth. They point to the unhappy experience of attempts to impose commercial farming, with its history of poor labour standards and clumsy machinery maintenance, and a disregard for the good of the land itself.

...

An experiment in Malawi is attracting world attention. A 10-year programme backed by Cru Investment's Africa Invest has acquired the leasehold of land to form two large (more than 100 ha) farms and two smaller ones. They employ local people, offering training and experience in working with new techniques and machinery, and teach skills like lorry driving and management.

At the same time, the operation supports local smallholders by buying in and marketing their surpluses at fair trade rates (it boasts of "the discipline of investment" over "aid hand-outs"). Jon Maguire, the chairman of the project, promises the villages will meet all the Millennium Development Goals within two years of start up. He claims that already he employs 2,000 people and pays well above poverty rates.

The idea behind it is that commercial investment can overcome some of the sustainability problems that dog aid projects. If the investment is economically viable, over the 10-year period of commitment – the theory goes – people involved in it will build up the expertise and knowledge to be able to take it on themselves. Alternatively, Africa Invest might renew its interest.

On paper, it has overcome all the obvious hurdles: it has security of tenure, but pays its landlords a share of the profits. It is spreading resources and knowhow throughout the community as well as contributing directly to poverty eradication. It can bring capital investment and marketing clout and it is seeking relationships with supermarkets to improve the share of the eventual sale price received by the grower. Too good to be true? Or a future for African agriculture?

Doha meetings are over, nothing much done

The meetings on international aid and free trade in Doha, Qutar are over. Nothing much was done except wondering why no one showed up, and going over development documents from 2002.

Ann Ninan of the IPS surveyed reaction from anti-poverty, and human rights groups on the meetings,

"The world urgently needs effective decisions and follow-up which are inclusive and decisive. Instead of action plans, (they) spent four days going back and forth on language, not on the food, energy, gender, climate, moral crises," says Sylvia Borren of the Global Call to Action against Poverty (GCAP).

As Borren put it, "What is disappointing is there is no bailout plan for the vulnerable peoples of the world, but huge bailouts for banks and financial institutions."

The review conference, however, reaffirmed the Monterrey goals. It also moved forward in some important areas, chiefly with regard to gender equality. The document commits to the promotion of gender equality and women’s economic empowerment as essential to achieving equitable and effective development.

"But this is not enough," asserts the Women’s Working Group on Financing for Development, a network of nine coalitions including the African Women’s Development and Communication Network (FEMNET), Association for Women’s Rights in Development (AWID) and the International Gender and Trade Network (IGTN).

"The commitments to gender equality in the document will only truly be meaningful if the systemic issues that underpin poverty are decisively addressed," say activists representing the 250 civil society groups and networks that participated in a two-day forum in Doha, Nov. 27-28, ahead of the official meeting.

The Doha conference was called by the U.N. not as a pledging conference but to review progress made in Monterrey, Mexico, in 2002, on commitments for new development aid from rich countries as well as agreements on debt relief, the fight against corruption, public-private partnerships and official development assistance (ODA).

Incentives to lure businees, how should poor nations do it?

Tax breaks and other incentives go on all the time to get business to invest and build at a location. It's commonplace here in the states, but poor nations have to do it to. But is it fair to give these breaks to business while receiving aid from other nations?

A round table session took place recently that discussed these issues as a part of the recent development and trade meetings in Doha. The Citizen Newspaper of Tanzania says that poor nations were warned against giving too much to lure new investments.

The speakers said there was "no logic" in allowing undue tax concessions and then going around the world begging for aid.

Some called for the rationalisation of current packages and revisiting of regulatory regimes and policies backing them.

"There is need for caution regarding incentives for foreign companies to invest, as that would reduce the tax base, but income from capital should not escape tax regulations," former UN economy under-secretary Vito Tanzi said.

The gathering, which included government leaders, financial and development experts, NGOs and UN officials appealed for assistance to help LDCs retain and tax the profits attributable to them from multinational corporations (MNCs).

The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) said governments should establish or strengthen regimes that place the highest tax requirements on capital gains.

They should also tax the rich accordingly and provide tax relief for low-income families and the poor.

No need to cut aid, just consolidate

A group of food aid organizations released a statement on development aid from the United States. The group says our government could be a lot more efficient with aid if they overhauled their system.

As the Guardian's own Roberta Hampton reports the food aid groups say changes should be made now. The many crisis that the world face with the credit crunch and the inflation of food could undo decades of development aid.

The $15 billion spent by the United States on aid would go further if there was a single agency held accountable for the efforts, said David Beckmann, president of Bread for the World, a coalition of U.S. Christian aid groups.

"When the government is debating what to do about trade or diplomacy, we need somebody at the table in the highest councils of the U.S. government to speak for poor people," Beckmann said in an interview.

Right now, 12 departments, 25 agencies and almost 60 different government offices have a role in developing U.S. aid policy and delivering programs, he said.

Prices for food staples have more than doubled around the world, leaving more people impoverished and malnourished at a time when the United States and other major aid donors are fixated on stabilizing their own domestic economies.

But Beckmann said he is optimistic the incoming Barack Obama administration will see aid spending as an investment in both global security and future markets for U.S. exports.

The new administration will be led by people who have strong track records on global development issues, he said, specifically naming Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner as well as New York Sen. Hillary Clinton who has reportedly been tapped to become U.S. secretary of state.

Several transition policy advisors to the president-elect have been advocates of foreign aid reform, Beckmann said, noting Obama himself has worked on global poverty issues.

What to cut? Emergency aid or development aid?

With the threat of cutting aid to underdeveloped nations the debate has sprung up about which type of aid will be cut. The kind of aid for natural disasters or for long term development projects for infrastructure and agriculture.

The United Nations says it need seven billion dollars for crisis aid, but will rich nations into the middle of the credit crisis only fund this instead of giving money for development, which will help more in the long term.

The IRIN looks this question in an article today.

The issue was addressed at the 15 November G20 meeting in Washington. The summit recognised “the impact of the current crisis on developing countries, particularly the most vulnerable” and reaffirmed the importance of the Millennium Development Goals, urging both developed and emerging economies “to undertake commitments consistent with their capacities and roles in the global economy”.

But, as Lurma Rackley, public relations director of CARE, told IRIN: “Meeting emergency needs often means taking money, time and staff away from long-term sustainable development programmes.

“Yet such programmes, related to agriculture, economic development, civil society, gender empowerment, healthcare and other areas have the potential for lifting communities out of poverty,” she told IRIN. “These are the very programmes that could help avoid the vicious cycle of dependence.”

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) is primarily concerned with complex emergencies and natural disasters, and immediate-response funding is a major concern.

“I would only hope that they [donors] would be able to differentiate the urgent life-saving aid and make sure that that was protected,” OCHA spokeswoman Stephanie Bunker told IRIN.

However, “We are concerned that if there’s a global economic downturn it could dampen the prospects for development assistance, which would be really bad, and for agricultural investment which, given the nature of the global food crisis, is part of the solution.”

Sorry for the lack of posting lately. Just before Thanksgiving is my busiest time of the year, and the blog usually takes a back seat. Also, my home computer was in repair yesterday, on top of a winter storm in Michigan. We will try to catch up between now and the weekend.

Commentary on the lack of research funding

A lot of people are writing/blogging advise for our new President. Out of all of the many, many that we have sifted through, we found this one interesting.

David Dickson, the director SctDev.net, says that he would like to see more funding of science breakthroughs that could aid development of poor nations. In this commentary that we found at Business Daily Africa, he gives several recommendations to our new President.

The Bush administration’s efforts to promote science for development have also suffered the same ideological pressures as its domestic science programmes — from opposition to stem cell research (for example, a bid to promote a ban through the United Nations) to reluctance to accept scientific evidence on climate change.

The new administration will not lack suggestions for improvements. Sensing the possibility of a significant change of tack, with the election of a Democrat, several recent reports have proposed how the US can better manage its international scientific affairs.

For example, the national academies of science, medicine and engineering have argued for a chief scientific adviser with cabinet status, charged with promoting science in foreign policy. As the US foreign secretary, Michael Clegg, points out, “attitudes towards US science are more positive than towards any other aspect of US society”.

Others recommend improving collaborations with developing countries. Alan Leshner, chief executive of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, claims that the US refusal to fund international partners means that for many poor countries “collaboration is doomed before it has begun”.

He has argued for new funding mechanisms to get round this problem, pointing out that the European Commission’s 7th Framework Programme allows non-European institutions to apply for research funding.

Others have suggested a US$100 million annual research and development fund, based on the Defense Department’s Defense Advanced Research Project Agency.

Hopefully, the new president will seriously consider all such recommendations. There should be little political disagreement on the vital role of science and technology for development policy.

Discarding the myths of development

from the BBC

By Steve Schifferes
Economics reporter, BBC News

Markets alone will not produce the growth in developing countries that will lift them out of poverty.

Government intervention in the economy, and a degree of protectionism, will be needed in the early stages of development.

These are the key findings of an independent Growth Commission made up of key policy makers and economists which was set up to find out the key elements that lead poor countries to get rich.


The report reaffirms the need for engagement with the global economy - including the transfer of key technologies and export specialisation - which are key to long-term sustainable growth.

But it points out that policies which support equality are also crucial to making sure the benefits are equally distributed, and to ensuring political support for globalisation.

IMF view under fire

The report is an implicit attack on the "Washington consensus", the belief that orthodox economic policy, complete opening of markets, and the reduction of the role of the state was the best way for developing countries to grow.

This view has often been re-enforced by strict rules set down the International Monetary Fund and World Bank as a condition to lending to countries in trouble.

The criticism is particularly striking, given that the Commission includes several key figures who shaped that consensus, including former US Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, former Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo, and South Korean president Han Duck Soo.

"Orthodoxies apply only so far," the report says.

"Economists know how mature markets work, and can say with some confidence how they will respond to their policy prescriptions."

But there is no such confidence in developing countries that lack key market and regulatory institutions, "and policy makers cannot always know how the a market will function without them".

Chinese example

It quotes approving Deng Xiaoping - the architect of China's liberalisation - saying that to find the path to economic growth "cross the river by feeling for the stones."

In recent years, the report says, "governments were advised to 'stabilise, privatise and liberalise'... but we believe this prescription defines the role of governments too narrowly.

"Just because governments are sometimes clumsy and sometimes errant, this does not mean they should be written out of the script."

Indeed, "no country has sustained rapid growth without also keeping up an impressive rate of public investment in infrastructure, education, and health.. far from crowding out private investment, this spending crowds it in".

Need for equality

The report also breaks ranks with the conventional wisdom in arguing that not just growth, but equitable growth, is needed.

It warned that "income equality is rising in a surprising number of countries across the globe" since the l980s.

And it warned that growing inequaility, as well as a rapid shift in the location of jobs, was fanning growing opposition to globalisation and free trade among the public.

As professor Robert Solow, a Nobel prize-winning economist who is a member of the commission said:

"The more equitable the growth, the more sustainable it is likely to be. Leadership and governance can only work when it is supported by wide parts of the population."

However, the report points out that democracy does not seem to be essential for fast growth, at least in the early stages.

Many of the 13 fastest-growing developing countries over the past 40 years - including China, Indonesia, Korea, Brazil and Singapore - had one-party governments for at least part of that period.

Radical measures by the rich

The report also calls the rich countries to play their role in helping encourage development.

It is highly critical of the spread of biofuels, which it says is hurting the poor in developing countries hard by exacerbating the food crisis.

And it calls for rich countries to "finance the expansion of Africa's higher education system to make up for Africa's 'brain drain'."

That is needed because a large proportion of Africa's highly educated doctors and engineers have migrated to rich countries where they can earn higher salaries.

Commission chairman Professor Michael Spence said that advanced economies needed to play their role "bringing to an end the current focus on energy subsidies and biofuels, and an end to protectionist policies which limit developing world access to global markets that are central to growth".

But with the key Doha Round of global trade talks stalled, and with rich countries growing more protectionist as their economies slow down, this goal seems further away than ever.

The World Bank recently warned that the Millenium Development Goals aimed at improving living standards in poor countries are falling far short, particularly in Africa.

The thirteen fast-growing developing countries considered by the report were: Botswana, Brazil, China, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Malta, Oman, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand.

[Comment] Ignoring the Real Foreign Threats

from Time

By Massimo Calabresi

If 9/11 brought home one strategic truth to Americans, it was that weak states now potentially pose as great a threat to the U.S. as strong states do. But recognizing that fact doesn't get you very far; it only acknowledges the scale of the problem. Of the 200-plus countries in the world, 130-140 are "developing," struggling with some combination of bad government, lack of security, underperforming economies and poverty. How to identify the ones that pose a looming danger, and finding a strategy to manage the different threats they present, is a major priority for U.S. national security —although you wouldn't know it to listen to the presidential candidates.

Still, the question of weak states underlies some of the uglier fights the candidates have had on foreign and national security policy. Iraq is, after all, a failed state, and the national argument over whether and how fast to get out is largely about the effects of instability if we do. In Tuesday's debate, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama danced around the difficult question of whether they'd re-invade Iraq if al-Qaeda reestablished itself there after the U.S. withdrew.

Likewise Clinton, Obama and John McCain have beaten each other up over Pakistan. The central government's inability to control al-Qaeda in its northwestern tribal territories, and concerns over Islamabad's nuclear arsenal, make handling relations with the country a particularly tricky problem. Hence the tumult over Barack Obama's fairly mainstream assertion that he would strike "high-value" terror targets in Pakistan if the leadership there could not. The confusion over when and whether to intervene across sovereign borders shows how little light has been shed on America's policy for responding to weak-state threats during the campaign.

Which is not to say that the candidates shouldn't debate Iraq and Pakistan policy — both are key issues. But America's foreign and national security policy megalith is still structured to handle superpower threats like the Soviet Union. What questions would a debate about weak-state strategy involve? A few suggestions:

# Would the candidates sacrifice expensive Cold War platforms such as the F-22 fighter to pay for more drones and Special Forces units?

# What are the development aid priorities of the candidates? Do they support President Bush's incentive-heavy Millennium Challenge Account? How do they explain the fact that many poor countries are worse off after years of Western foreign aid?

# Should the U.S. risk sacrificing Ethiopian military support in the fight against al-Qaeda in neighboring Somalia by insisting Addis Ababa improve its abysmal human rights record and embrace political liberalization?

# Do the candidates think China's soaring economic and diplomatic influence in the developing world is a net plus or minus for stability and what would they do to try and channel the effects of its massive investments there?

# What steps would the candidates take to better coordinate international responses to pandemic disease?

# Should developing countries get a pass on reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the interest of speeding economic growth?

Just because the candidates haven't been debating a larger strategy for handling weak states doesn't mean they're not thinking about it. Clinton has several experts on failed states advising her, including Richard Holbrooke, who negotiated the end of the Balkan wars, and Madeleine Albright, who made expanding democracy the theoretical aim of her tenure as Bill Clinton's Secretary of State. McCain's director of foreign and national security policy is Randy Scheunemann, from the conservative Project for a New American Century, who as a Senate adviser handled issues of military intervention in the Balkans and Somalia. And one of Obama's top campaign advisors, Susan Rice, has in the course of her work at the Brookings Institution produced, with Stewart Patrick of the Center for Global Development, a 50-page index of weak states that ranks 141 developing countries according to 20 factors such incidence of coups, GDP growth and primary school completion. The idea is to define state weakness in a way that identifies problem countries, and shows which areas in them need the most attention.

None of the candidates has said what concrete steps they would take to reorient the tools of American power to better handle the threats produced by weak states. And it's not clear how much of the strategic lesson has seeped up to the candidates from the advisors who know something about it. But for all the talk of the experience required to be Commander in Chief in the post-9/11 era, it might be useful to start asking.

Making Progress

from MSNBC

These 3 companies from across the globe are creating products specifically intended to help developing countries.
By Kristin Edelhauser Chessman
Entrepreneur.com

With R&D departments, financial backing and forward-thinking leaders, businesses are in a prime position to create products that can improve life for people in developing countries across the world.

An increasing number of companies are integrating social responsibility into their business models. According to Julie Pohlig, senior analyst for Vital Wave Consulting, almost all multinational companies--especially in health, telecom and technology--are designing products or exploring new business models specifically for developing-country markets.

But, Pohlig adds, just because a startup is fighting for a good cause doesn't mean the funding will come easily. "Venture capitalists are leery of funding projects outside of geographies they know well," she says. "Very few organizations exist that fund startup projects designed specifically for developing-country markets."

Entrepreneur Brian Julius didn't let that stop him from finding venture capital for his startup, Books of Hope. Though Julius initially funded the business with his own resources, the literacy-focused company joined forces with the Acumen Fund, which invests in entrepreneurial companies helping solve global poverty. "Their support gives us a lot of credibility, and they also have fabulous connections and networking to tell people about what these books can do," Julius says.

The company's products--"speaking books"--are interactive, multilingual, hard-backed books with five-minute recorded sound boxes. Regardless of reading ability, readers can absorb the colorful illustrations and press the button on the keypad to hear a local celebrity's voice read the text in their local language. Titles deal with major health concerns in developing countries such as malaria, tuberculosis, HIV and AIDS. So far, Books of Hope has published and distributed more than 100,000 speaking books in Southern Africa alone.

The company has roots in South Africa, where Julius' partner, Zane Wilson, developed the idea for speaking books to spread healthcare education in areas with low levels of literacy. Wilson, also founder of the South African Depression and Anxiety Support Group, worked with Julius to get their first title, Suicide Shouldn't Be A Secret, in the hands of African teens in late 2005. By mid-2006, Julius opened two offices in the U.S., including his headquarters in Hilton Head, South Carolina, and an office in Washington, DC.

Though Books of Hope won't release sales figures, Julius says the company was profitable within two years in South Africa, and he believes the company will have positive cash flow in the U.S. within two years. The speaking books range in price from just under $9 per book to about $10 depending on the type of batteries used and the quantity ordered.

"We have 10 books in production right now," says Julius. "Our 17th book, on malaria, was delivered last week." Julius says research proves the concept is working. "Typically, about 10 or 20 people view each book that's distributed, though we had one community in Southern Africa where we got an average of 59 users per book."

Books of Hope soon will be tackling the issue of clean drinking water, a cause Switzerland-based Vestergaard Frandsen has been focusing on for the past 12 years. In 2005, Vestergaard Frandsen debuted the LifeStraw personal tool, a device designed to prevent the transmission of bacteria, viruses and parasites in drinking water.

The company wasn't always in the business of humanitarian efforts. When Kaj Vestergaard Frandsen founded the company in Denmark in 1957, it was a traditional textile company. Through the years, the company was passed down through the family, and is now in the hands of Mikkel Vestergaard Frandsen, who has placed an emphasis on addressing critical public health issues.

According to the company, about 90 percent of its business comes from its treated mosquito nets, called PermaNet. Vestergaard Frandsen sells between 3 and 5 million nets every month, at about $5 each. The LifeStraw also sells for about $5 each. In addition, the company produces ZeroFly, a plastic sheeting that people can use as a tarp or tent in emergencies.

At the International Aid + Trade event in Geneva on January 29, the latest addition to the LifeStraw line will debut--LifeStraw family. It has a similar filter to the personal tool, but is larger and has a reservoir holder and tube attached that allows people to filter water for home use.

Lakeland, Florida-based Solicore also hopes to improve life for people in developing countries, but in a completely different way. Solicore, a leader in embedded power solutions, offers ultra-thin flexible lithium polymer batteries for powered cards, radio frequency identification devices and micro-medical devices. The company, which was founded by three entrepreneurs through a merger between Skylab and Leading Edge Technologies, recently partnered with nCryptone to fuel the MaatCard by UNIPAY'S--an acoustic bankcard powered by Solicore's Flexion batteries.

Solicore discovered that a majority of Africans are underserved by traditional banking infrastructures, which has led to the need for mobile banking services for villages and rural areas. The company also learned from a survey by the Consultative Group to Assist the Poor that more than 800 million mobile phones were sold in developing countries in the past three years and that Africa is the fastest-growing mobile phone market in the world. Armed with that information, Solicore has become the sole battery provider for the MaatCard, which is a multi-application, multi-component, multi-channel bankcard.



The card generates a one-time sonic password used to authenticate mobile banking transactions over a phone line. So consumers can complete transactions over the phone with the same security they would receive during an ATM, credit card or online transaction.

The card has received approval from the Central Bank of Central African States and is beginning a pilot program with a partner bank of UNIPAY'S in Cameroon. Thanks to the recent launch of the card, Solicore is preparing for expansion this year. "Solicore has experienced an explosive growth in the powered-card segment in the past several months and saw shipments of hundreds of thousands of units," says Solicore CEO Dave Corey. "Solicore is expecting to see shipments in millions of units, which represents 10 times growth."

Follow in Their Footsteps

If these business owners have inspired you to create a product to benefit developing countries, Pohlig offers these key tips:
# Understand the differences between developed and developing-country markets.
# Focus on business model innovations to make products more affordable and accessible.
# Ensure executive support.

International aid plea to parties

from The Herald

Eight international development agencies have challenged political parties to focus at least one campaign day over the next month on global poverty.

Oxfam, Christian Aid, Save the Children, the Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund (SCIAF) and Islamic Relief are among those who want Sunday, April 15, a week after Easter, to be designated Development Day.

International aid is a reserved power for Westminster, but in the past four years support has grown for Holyrood becoming involved in direct links with Africa, particularly Malawi, after Jack McConnell visited the nation.
advertisement

A joint letter from the agencies has called for the spirit of the Make Poverty History campaign two years ago to be kept going into the next session of the Scottish Parliament.

"We are also aware of the depth of need in Malawi and in many other countries across the world," it says.

"That need, coupled with strong public support for more action, is why we believe that all parties should be setting out how they will take forward this policy."

Paul Chitnis, chief execu-tive of SCIAF, commented: "Recent opinion polling by SCIAF has shown very high levels of public support for Scottish politicians to take action on tacking global poverty.

"With a combination of public support here and great need in far too many coun-tries around the world, it's time for Scotland's politicians to bridge that gap and set out how they are going to take the aid policy forward."