Is western aid a gift or a curse for Africa?
In a web-exclusive article for Prospect this week, Kevin Watkins—an expert on international development and aid, and Senior Visiting Research Fellow at Oxford University’s Global Economic Governance Programme—looks at Dambisa Moyo’s book Dead Aid and its controversial thesis that western governments should replace their current aid policy for Africa with “a hefty dose of cold-turkey.” What should we make of this radical position?, he asks: “Is it time for Bono and Bob Geldof to stop haranguing rich world leaders for a better deal for Africa? Should Oxfam campaigners be matching under the banner ‘Turn off the Aid Taps Now’?”
The answer, Watkins suggests, is far more complex than Moyo’s analysis allows, most centrally because of Dead Aid’s “failure to explore why past aid has delivered so little.” As he puts it, the fact that aid policies themselves have failed to solve Africa’s problems is as inconclusive a proof of their uselessness as the argument that “fire engines cause fires because you find them near burning houses.” The question of what does and can work is, Watkins argues, a hugely important one for the 21st century to answer when faced by the appalling conditions in which hundreds of millions of Africans live. But simply turning off the taps is no solution. As ever, let us know what you think below.
Share
Comments
Print
Add Comment
The real problem with Africa is not the issue of aid. It is an issue of what exists in the Western political systems in a hidden form being explicit in Africa. Britain is no shining angel to Africa. Whether it is corporate corruption (remember the BAE Saudi deal?) or or political – fiddling expenses (or using sling boxes to watch blue movies and balming it on hubby)- it exists and persists.
Aid comes with a price. US military aid? Who benefits? The Russians in Afganistan funded education, infrastructure developments and housing etc. The US and Britains Iraqi wars aids Halliburton, Blackwater and Bechtel, DynCorp International, Louis Berger Group and Bearing Point. So the ‘aid’ probably never even arrives to the country it is earmarked for….
When aid does indeed arrive in Africa it is often given to corrupt governments who increasingly play the internation US versus China game. Aid is often a bribe to secure access to or control of valuable natural assets.
The old British strategy of devide and conquer is much evident as a strategy by major international ‘donors’. Countless people die.
Direct funding for specific economic improvement, direct provision of clean water, direct provision of solar technology as well as direct provision of basic housing is what is needed. Where aid is given to the ‘rulers’ in Africa it becomes a tool for population control and a weapon against those who fight for basic human rights. Education too is key and is perhaps the most important element aside from health provision (you cannot educate a dead person).
Equally empowerment and cooperative endeavours by locals for locals rather than the traditional sending in of foreign highly paid so-called experts is critical.
I saw the UN compound in Colombo after the Tsunami and the hugh influx of ‘Western experts’, the enormous expenditure on extending the UN facilities – to the detriment of the humanitarian situation on the ground. While the UN flustered the governemtn and the LTTE stuck out their hads to grab as much cash as possible and the tsunami became an integral part of the war. Both sides abused funds… Africa is be no different.
So the fault lies with the West more than it does with Africa. It is the politics behind aid that is the problem. To eradicate corruption in Africa necessitates first eradicating corruption in the West.
It is likely that Africa will find its own solution before corporate and political corruption becomes a thing of the past in the West. Meanwhile Bono and Bob will continue to play a critical role. Partly because the Irish understand the problems of Africa. We have lived it and we have survived despite of it.
Of course it is Kevin’s job to defend aid otherwise he would not have one! The article on the web does not disclose that Kevin Watkins works, or spent a number of years working for the UN’s Human Development Office. The UN is one of the largest distributors of Aid. Surely this should be disclosed?
He states in the article generalisations like “In fact, there is a large body of academic work pointing in the opposite direction” There is also much academic work showing the reverse, starting with Peter Bauer at LSE.
To ask Lord Bauer’s question, how many billions has Kevin’s [old] organisation distributed from the poor of the rich world to the rich of the poor world?
The argument against people like Kevin is coming from Africans, not pop stars and employees of Aid Organisations. Dambisa Moyo is not alone, her views are shared by other Africans like George Ayittey see his video at TED http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/george_ayittey_on_cheetahs_vs_hippos.html
The issue is that there are more foreigners handing out aid working in Africa than there where white people in Africa when these countries where officially ruled from Europe.
Aid has become the new way to control Africa.
I look forward to hearing an African view, for example Dambisa Moyo, rather than an Imperialist.
The controversy of aid to Africa is related to a wider issue of how actions are so often imposed on, or directed to, a system (social, economic, environmental) by individuals or agencies that are external to that system, that do not fully understand its inner complexities and may themselves be structured in relatively rigid and uncreative ways. A number of cases, as well as the proposal for alternative ways of operating are discussed in F. David Peat’s book, “Gentle Action: Bringing Creative Solutions to a Turbulent World”. There is also an accompanying website at http://www.gentleaction.org which contains a number of new cases and examples and a blog at http://www.gentleaction.org/blog.
Great point James. And to further the discussion, Kevin and those of his ilk are obviously threatened by the prospect of losing their coffers. The people responsible for African children not reaching age 5 due to disease are Africans and their governments. Why does no one ever hold them accountable. African govts get all this aid anually, and what exactly do they show for it? I’m an African, and for one I’m sick of this pity party. Unless someone says to me that Africans are inherrently incapable of taking care of themselves, I think the Africans should be held accountable.
The core problems are created by the governments of emerging markets not aiad flows although they can exacerbate problems. the level of returns to aid spending mirror the generally low returns to public spending in countries characterised by corrupt governments and lack of budget and fiscal discipline. if countries have a transparent budget process and effective fiscal and budget discipline with budgets being spent largely as planned, then returns to aid tend higher than the basket cases. more aid tends to be available to those better performing countries rather than those where absolute povery prevails along side government policy that render aid flows ineffective.
aid is not the bogy man. it is the governments that demand it as a proxy for good governance and transformation. often the political determinants dominate sensible allcation and design of assistance eg iraq after bush “liberated’the country. the quagmire of aid that was produced by donors then is still being waded through today and has created a serious corruption problem.
I actually thought Watkin’s article was quite balanced– he admits that aid donors have a “mixed record” as do the 50+ African countries’ governments. And he makes a strong argument for better coordination among donors, which I believe is the most essential factor in helping countries to achieve their development goals.
Ms. Moyo very title is intended to shock and be provocative but her thesis is radically impractical given the constant history of interventions in Africa by ill and well intentioned actors. The BRICS, Eastern Europe and even previously strong emerging economies are suffering in the current climate and require “aid”. Therefore, now is an inappropriate time to bash the weak non-productive economies that still are not trading in the international system. I would also like to point out the continuing brain drain represented by the educated Africans who refuse to go back and work in their countries, preferring to snipe from the sidelines.
Development assistance may be more appropriate and accurate terminology than aid, which is loaded with prejudicial assciations. National communities in individual African countries are increasingly capable of their own strategic planning and can now require that donor partners cooperate in the implementation of the country’s stated priorities. Certainly, in many countries, some of which had few college graduates at independence, this kind of national strategic planning could not have taken place earlier.
The problem of corruption and its resulting incompetence remains but as one comment already highlighted, corruption is a two way street. Good governance comes with national maturity that legitimizes systems which provide and distribute public goods while offering access to citizens for their input. I have lived and worked in several African countries and know that given their small GDPs, it is often difficult for them to provide basic health, education and sanitation– which is exactly where the ngos move in to provide those services which the governments cannot or do not.
So let’s be practical and realistic about redressing poverty in all its manifestations. The need for development assistance is still required but it must be designed in large part by its intended beneficiaries. That is the equity we should seek.