CGD Policy Blogs
This is a joint post with Rita Perakis.
What are the objectives of U.S. foreign aid programs? Development itself? National security? Improving diplomatic relations? Humanitarian response to emergencies?
One answer to that question comes from what Congress and the Administration say – in the Presidential Study Directive, President Obama’s development speech at the United Nations, what Secretary Clinton said in her development speech last year, and what Administrator Raj Shah has been saying in recent speeches. And of course what the Congress says in authorizing legislation --- but oops the Foreign Assistance Act is 50 years old (and hasn’t even been reauthorized since 1985), as lamented in this 2-minute video.
Jean Arkedis in a recent CGD paper (done when she was seconded from the State Department two years ago) says that the U.S. government isn’t very clear about those objectives – and why not clarify by assigning spending lines in the federal budget to one or more of those objectives above? Recently Connie Veillette has also weighed in.
U.S. Policy Sparks Fireworks over Firm-Level Reporting at the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative
There were surprise fireworks at the recent Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative (EITI) 5th Global Conference in Paris—fireworks that could have far-reaching implications for the movement to root out corruption associated with huge oil, gas and mining contracts.
I was excited to see the announcement that the UK’s Department for International Development (DFID) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are partnering to support “agricultural research projects to help small farmers increase their yields and incomes.” But I was also puzzled.
Especially in times of budget pressure, the debate over rationales for foreign assistance revive. Last night on PBS’ Newshour, former First Lady Laura Bush, Melinda Gates, and Helene Gayle, president of CARE, spoke eloquently about the importance of Congress maintaining funding for maternal and child health. I was heartened and impressed by their commitment, but also a little discomfited by the emphasis on national security as a key motivation for aid.
After dropping for the first time (albeit slightly) in January, Grameen's deposit base reportedly held steady last month. Below is the updated graph. I know of no other major microfinance institution that provides such high-frequency data. This offers some reassurance against the fear I raised before that a bank run would develop, at least as of 10 days ago.
The current budget debates on finishing up the 2011 budget and then tackling 2012 have raised concerns among international affairs budget wonks. As policy makers search for ways to balance the U.S.
This week, Dr. Seth Berkley was named Chief Executive Officer of the GAVI Alliance. Expectations are high as GAVI seeks to raise US$ 3.7 billion this year for childhood vaccination in poor countries. Here are some ideas and questions for Dr. Berkley’s first day at work – welcome!
This is a joint post with Nancy Birdsall.
Interest in Cash on Delivery Aid has been so strong that we’ve printed a second edition of the book which can be purchased or downloaded online. Here is our new preface:
Since Cash on Delivery: A New Approach to Foreign Aid was published in March 2010, the ideas we proposed have been embraced by presidents and ministers, by heads of public and private institutions, and by researchers and practitioners. The Education Ministry in Malawi sent us a letter asking for help creating a COD Aid program there, the British government has publicly committed to financing pilot experiences, and articles and essays have addressed COD Aid in a range of publications including The Economist, The New York Times, and Public Choice. In the debates that ensued, we have learned even more about the Cash on Delivery Aid (COD Aid) approach and how significant a departure it could be from current aid practices.