Foreign aid Bad or Good
Foreign aid or assistance is often considered as being too much, or it is wasted on corrupt recipient governments despite any good intentions from donor countries. In reality, aid have been poor in quantity and quality and donor nations have not been held to account. We can’t say it’s an aid it’s only a trade. It’s an important part of development . But aid have been criticized in the issue of international obligations, as an excuse for rich countries to stop the aid that has been agreed and promised at the United Nations. Recently, there was a pledge to spend 0.56% of GNI on poverty reduction by 2010, and 0.7% by this year . However, 0.7% of GNP were spent by the donor governments as promised. 1970 was the deadline
…show more content…
Measured as a proportion of GNI, aid lags for behind the 0.8 percent target the United Nations 46 years ago. In many cases; to be helpful to the strategic and economic interests of the donor countries(rich countries) we have came up with the idea of aid. Or we have came up with it to benefit powerful domestic interest groups. Countries that most desperately need aid reaches too little of it. All too often, aid is wasted on overpriced goods and services from donor countries. despite all indications that aid fails, a dominant position in aid granting countries and aid agencies is that the aid is helpful to recipient countries. This conviction is based on prejudices, wishful thinking or biased evaluation. Evidences show that foreign aid has no tangible impact on the long-term economic growth and improvement of conditions in target countries. This is in accord with a broader conviction that central planning that never ended poverty. Evaluation has a task and it is to hide failure and damage by reporting some degree of …show more content…
the record shows, that without good institutions, in a recipient developing country, aid have a detrimental impact on the quality of governance. In the absence of these strong institutions, we should dedicate assistance efforts to improve the quality of governance before they can be effectively devoted to any economic development effort. Although more progress has been made over the course of the last 50 or so years in alleviating poverty than during any comparable period of time in history, poverty remains a huge global challenge. Over one billion of the world’s people live in conditions of poverty, surviving on less than $1 a day. What donors want aid buys (such as political support and economic advantage) The rich countries need to show that they support poor countries ,then certainly greater risk: accept fairer trade rules, adapt rapidly to climate change and resource scarcity we limit our consumption, accept the employment consequences of a more just arms trade, clamp down on tax havens and force our international companies to abide by social, environmental and accounting norms. Being so generous requires rich countries to undergo fairly profound changes in the way they have lived for the last few decades. The notion that giving away our loose change is embarrassingly generous would be an odd one to poor people around the world trying
Before extending aid to other countries, we should focus on our more prevalent domestic problems. Patrick Buchanan said, "The idea that we should send endless streams of tax dollars all over the world, while our own country sinks slowly in an ocean of debt is, well, ludicrous. Almost every American knows it, feels it, believes it." The topic of United States foreign policy is greatly debated, and a decision on how to handle is very hard to come by. It seems as if we are finally leaning towards less aid to foreign countries, as we try to cut wasteful spending. The American government is finally opening its eyes to the realization that all of the aid we are giving out may not be worth it. Our priority should be to help our homeless, instead of other countries' poor.
... aid across the world. As we have established that we do have an obligation to redistribute globally in a cosmopolitan perspective, distributing wealth however we may need to rethink what the best assistance is. Amaryta Sen conveys that before sending aid to the third world state, we would need to fully understand the limitation of freedom in the country. Redistributing wealth to global countries requires it to be evaluated by the economic shortage that they are suffering and to see whether it will be efficient in the long run. The more effective ways to contribute would be to international relief agencies or NGO’s that would pursue international development projects to help those in poverty or the alternative option by Tom Campbell’s idea of a ‘Global humanitarian levy’ which suggests a more appropriate taxation on all citizens to collectively aid those in need.
Jamieson, D. (2005). Duties to the Distant: Aid, Assistance, and Intervention in the Developing World. Journal Of Ethics, 9(1/2), 151-170. doi:10.1007/s10892-004-3324-9
The United States is one of the leading suppliers of Foreign Aid in the world, and even though the US gives billions, European countries give aid money to the same countries, this causes many areas of the Middle East, Africa, and Asia to be almost fully dependent on foreign aid. This means that without aid from other countries, they would not be able to support themselves at all. Foreign aid is meant to help countries that are struggling with civil unrest, disease, or natural disasters, it is not meant to help keep the country out of debt, but that is where more and more of the US and The EU’s foreign aid budget is going. The question is, does all this money actually go where it is intended? It should be going towards the government and to help the people, but in many cases, the countries government does not have the resources to properly track the flow of money. The countries in most cases have poor infrastructure and corrupt or oppressive leaders, not always at a national level, but in the towns and cities. So this means there is almost no way to oversee the flow of foreign aid through the country, all we can see is that their situations aren't getting any better and the countries are still impoverished. If this is the case, where are the millions of dollars going? Countries like Afghanistan and Iraq receive the most money from American foreign aid and European aid, yet they are still under oppressive governmental rule and there is still an extreme difference between the rich and poor. Garrett Harding’s theory of “Lifeboat Ethics” exemplifies how not giving aid to others will allow the strongest of society to thrive, while teaching the impoverished to help themselves. He believes that giving aid to poor countries will only make ...
The way in which foreign aid is distributed is highly ineffective and fails to achieve its sole purpose. Corruption ravages the developing world; greedy diplomats and fraudulent officials are often known to embezzle vast amounts of the aid money given to help those most in need. As Lord P. T. Bauer of London School for Economics famously said, foreign aid is “an excellent method for transferring money from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries.” The money does not reach those who need it but is instead pocketed by dishonest members of government in foreign countries. Over the past years more than half a billion pounds have been invested in Africa yet there is little visual improvement in extreme poverty, deprivation and the child mortality rate. Evidently, Britain’s aid scheme is uselessly trying to combat poverty against a brick wall of bureaucracy. Without doubt this money would be better invested within the UK improving health and education and lowering the deficit.
Developed countries should not simply hand money to third world countries, as this gives no incentive to develop responsible government or fiscal policies. Dambisa Moyo, an international economist from Zambia, comments on foreign aid, stating that “aid is easy money” (Collier). If a person were to give a man in need a small sum of m...
For example in regards to the ability for democracy to succeed in Africa, “The Economist … asserts that democracy in Africa has been unsuccessful because elections have largely failed to produce a change in democracy” whereas, “ the 1999 elections in Nigeria and South Africa indicate that democracy can be sustained in Africa.” Finally in chapter four Egendorf contemplates the First World nations role in Third World countries. The topics of U.S. foreign aid, U.S.’s role in Africa and the United Nations’ role in third world countries. In regard to U.S. foreign aid, “J. Brian Atwood … argues that foreign aid has helped finance medical and agricultural advances that have led to decreased child mortality and greater crop yields.” On the other hand, “L. Jacobo Rodriguez … argues that, despite the claims of some foreign aid proponents. The postwar economic growth of Europe and Asia was not a result of U.S financial assistance.” Throughout the book Egendorf discusses many highly debatable topics regarding Third World countries and shows substantial evidence to prove both sides of each
Since the countries that receive foreign aid are usually underdeveloped countries that lack solid government systems there can be the issue of local corruption. Developed states tend to use this excuse as a reason not to provide the aid that should be given to the global poor, but it is not the rich states place to comment or deal with local corruption because as we saw in the relatively widespread failure of structural adjustment programs on the African continent, when the West intervenes in the economies of sovereign states they tend to cause more damage than repair in the long run. Aid should be sent no questions asked in the same way that China is now investing in countries all over Africa. If foreign aid wants to by-pass the hands of local corruption then they should send people to directly use the aid for state development. The developed part of the world could also support change in global institutions, which favour poor countries. Even if it is not ‘feasible’ or ‘possible,’ there should still be a move towards a more egalitarian model because rich states were able to develop at a time when there restrictive global institutional practices did not exist and in contrast the Global South is struggling to develop not only in a shorter time frame but under a vastly different economic and
...ut a set of goals that includes a quantitative element. This will return the 0.7% figure to what it was originally intended to be, a figure to make countries donate more to aid, as opposed to an almost venerated figure. This essay therefore concludes that the UK, if it wants to further its aims of both international recognition for its foreign aid alongside granting effective aid, needs to adopt a target that consists of three elements instead of one by using a quantitative figure, evidence from developing nations and a figure that represents the targeting of aid.
Poverty has conquered nations around the world, striking the populations down through disease and starvation. Small children with sunken eyes are displayed on national television to remind those sitting in warm, luxiourious houses that living conditions are less than tolerable around the world. Though it is easy to empathize for the poor, it is sometimes harder to reach into our pocketbooks and support them. No one desires people to suffer, but do wealthy nations have a moral obligation to aid poor nations who are unable to help themselves? Garrett Hardin in, "Lifeboat Ethics: The Case Against Helping The Poor," uses a lifeboat analogy to expose the global negative consequences that could accompany the support of poor nations. Hardin stresses problems including population increase and environmental overuse as downfalls that are necessary to consider for the survival of wealthy nations. In contrast, Peter Singer's piece, "Rich and Poor," remarks on the large differences between living conditions of those in absolute poverty with the wealthy, concluding that the rich nations possess a moral obligation to the poor that surpasses the risks involved. Theodore Sumberg's book, "Foreign Aid As Moral Obligation," documents religious and political views that encourage foreign aid. Kevin M. Morrison and David Weiner, a research analyst and senior fellow respectively at the Overseas Development Council, note the positive impact of foreign aid to America, a wealthy nation. Following the examination of these texts, it seems that not only do we have a moral obligation to the poor, but aiding poor nations is in the best interest of wealthy nations.
The allocation of foreign aid in international society is not predicated by notions of necessity and development, but rather by self interest and power. Foreign aid’s altruistic façade can often serve to mask a vehement power struggle between the super powers of global politics. In such a struggle aid is used as a currency to purchase power and influence. These powerful gains can be broken into three different categories, the first and most tangible of these gains is the economic dominance that foreign aid grants the donor nation, this is then followed by the security and stability that accompanies strategic aid allocation and finally the gain of soft power through the spread of norms, values and ideologies is prevalent in this ostensibly
Recent discussion of foreign aid has ignited the sparks of controversy. On one hand, some argue that sub-Saharan nations use donated money to improve economic conditions by establishing anti-corruption agencies. From this perspective, new and stable governments generate revenue, alleviating the populatio...
In today’s age of emerging globalisation and global governance, every country in this world are connected as one global economy. It is evident that poverty in developing countries cannot be ignored by the West, as our society today is interwoven among different networks of global trade, diplomacy and economic co-operations through various institutions such as the United Nations (UN), European Union (EU), North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). However, the effectiveness of the foreign policies drafted by these organizations can be questioned as it has done little to reduce poverty in poor nations. The new global economic order is seen as being harsh on the poor. Through the Western countries’ superior bargaining power, poor countries are often exploited through their weaknesses, ignorance, or even corruptibility so that the negotiations often result in greater benefit for Western countries.
...liberalisations have had adverse consequences for some – including the poorest people – but should we automatically condemn trade initiatives because it means that one person loses or is pushed into poverty? The identification of hardship arising from a generally desirable policy reform should stimulate the search for complementary policies to minimise the adverse consequences and reduce the hurt that they unintentionally cause (Winters, 2002). ‘No country has successfully developed its economy by turning its back on international trade and long-term foreign investment’; although trade alone may not offer a solution for poverty reduction, the OECD and DFID have recently published reports identifying that combining aid and trade initiatives and encouraging the integration of trade and aid could progressively and sustainably alleviate poverty (OEDC, 2009; DFID, 2005).
Peter Burnell and Lise Rakner 2008 Governance and Aid Conditionality in a Globalizing World. United States of America: Oxford University Press