In development it is money that matters

The prospects of achieving the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015 seem distant. Changing trends in development focus on a new issue every time – better governance, less corruption, more community involvement, a greater role for the private sector and so on. Perhaps donors should offer more money, instead.

An article in the Instituteof Development Studies Bulletin (UK), reviews estimates of the resources requiredto achieve the MDGs, shows that the recent growth of aid has been insufficientto achieve them and counters arguments that more aid would be ineffective. Theauthor challenges donors to change the amount and type of aid that they giveand the means by which they give it.

The argument that aidrecipients lack capacity to use donor aid is no longer seems plausible.Dedicated staff with professional training in health andeducation are now abundant at district government level in manydeveloping countries. If civil servants are sitting idly and not working it is usuallybecause they do not have resources or even the means, to get out of theiroffices.

Critics of aid complain aboutrecipient ‘incapacity’, but much of this is the result of reporting demands of donors.Government officials are often too busy managing donors to spend timedelivering government services. Donors spread their aid over too many countries– so each government has to deal with a range of different donors.

Donors push technicalassistance, even when it is obvious that it is material support that isrequired. Teachers, for example, may be trained to put desks in circles and todisplay posters on the wall, even though they may have neither desks, posters nor, in some cases, even walls. Donorenthusiasm for promoting ‘social capital’ can lead to aid money being spent on teachingpeople to hold meetings.

The author shows that:

• Donorharmonisation is much talked about, but little progress has been made.
• Many sectorprogrammes actually comprise a large number of traditional project-styleactivities: the share of genuine budget support remains low.
• Lack of money isthe reason why immunisation coverage in Africaremains at unacceptably low levels.
• Donors providefunding for workshops and overseas travel, but then express surprise thatgovernment officials take advantage of opportunities which distract them fromtheir duties.

There is no shortage ofthings which could be financed by immediately doubling the level of aid – immunisation,school rehabilitation, provision of school text-books, school feedingprogrammes, incentive payments to teachers in rural areas, cash transfers topromote school attendance, rural infrastructure – the list is endless, andthere are staff ready and willing to deliver services.

The author calls on donorsto:

• avoid thetendency to micro manage programmes and stop demanding excessive monitoring
• show morehumility: policy discussions could become real dialogues in which donors helpcreate spaces for public discussion of development priorities, not dictate theoutcomes
• ensure more aidis really pro-poor
• put more emphasis on providing goods and services for thepoor and less on technical assistance.