blog logo image

Posts Tagged ‘developing world’

MFAN Members Respond to the QDDR Preview

Thursday, October 28th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

InteractionMFAN Partner InterAction’s Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) page – a new page that features guest blog posts, policy analysis by InterAction staff, and other statements and news related to the QDDR – is buzzing over Secretary Clinton’s recently released Foreign Affairs article.  In the piece, Secretary Clinton gives insight into the final QDDR, rumored to be released by the end of the year.

Yesterday, we featured a guest post from InterAction’s page by MFAN Principal John Norris. Today, we’re featuring a reaction piece by MFAN Members Todd Shelton, Senior Director of Public Policy and External Relations, and Filmona Hailemichael, Policy and Advocacy Coordinator – both of InterAction. Taking a more critical tone the authors argue that while it is commendable for the Secretary to seek to elevate development, development in and of itself must be viewed as a way to achieve strategic US objectives and not as “just one more tool in the State Department’s toolbox.” Shelton and Hailemichael express concern over the range of tradeoffs in the QDDR including between short-term and long-term interests, distinct missions and overlapping authorities, and fragile states versus the poorest of the poor.  The authors are also troubled by the almost complete lack of implementing partners in the development discussion.  See below for key excerpts:

“The overall frame that elevates “civilian power” is positive, but many in the development community will be troubled by the implied fusing of development resources so closely with short-term political interests. While the Secretary asserts that “the State Department and USAID have distinct roles and missions,” her article fails to ensure the leadership space necessary for development expertise and effectiveness to flourish. Instead, Clinton declares that “the two Ds (development and diplomacy) reflect the world as the State Department sees it today and as it envisions it in the future.” What about other development partners? Where do they fit in?”

“The Secretary’s essay makes it very clear that the State Department and its embassies have primacy but the USAID Mission Director’s coordinating and leadership role for development priorities is overlooked. Furthermore, she emphasizes the expanding definition of diplomacy to include development and explains how this will change the roles of career State Department Foreign Service Officers to be more development savvy.”

“We’re also troubled and perplexed by the almost complete lack of acknowledgement of the important role played by State and USAID’s partners — the U.S. NGO community. NGOs are vital for building the local business and civil society capacity that the Secretary proposes and for raising donations from the American public that often exceed official U.S. development dollars.”

Clinton Gives Preview of QDDR

Wednesday, October 27th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

Clinton-CGDIn an article titled “Leading Through Civilian Power—Redefining American Diplomacy and Development” that will be published in the Nov/Dec edition of Foreign Affairs, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton lays out the contours of the first-ever Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR), which was launched by the State Department in the summer of 2009 and is set to be finalized and made public by the end of the year.

Clinton has been a strong proponent of a “smart power” approach for U.S. foreign policy, which leverages the “three Ds” of defense, diplomacy, and development.  Since becoming secretary of state, she has sought to elevate and bolster the civilian components of diplomacy and development within that framework, and the QDDR is a tool to operationalize and hopefully optimize the relationship between the two, using the Defense Department’s existing Quadrennial Defense Review as a model. “During my years on the Senate Armed Services Committee, I saw how the Department of Defense used its Quadrennial Defense Review to align its resources, policies, and strategies for the present — and the future,” Clinton writes. “No similar mechanism existed for modernizing the State Department or USAID.”

In making the case for the value of this exercise, Clinton states, “The QDDR is not simply a review. It defines how to make diplomacy and development coordinated, complementary, and mutually reinforcing. It assesses what has worked in the past and what has not. And it forecasts future strategic choices and resource needs.”

Clinton goes on to highlight Congress’ continued support for the hiring of additional Foreign Service Officers at State and USAID, including the doubling of development staff  “with the specific skills and experience required for evolving development challenges.” This in turn will help make USAID “the world’s premier development organization, one that fosters long-term growth and democratic governance, includes its own research arm, shapes policy and innovation, and uses metrics to ensure that our investments are cost-effective and sound.”

But she asserts very clearly that diplomacy and development must work in close concert.  “Although the State Department and USAID have distinct roles and missions, diplomacy and development often overlap and must work in tandem,” she writes. “Increasingly, global challenges call for a mix of both, requiring a more holistic approach to civilian power… While USAID leads U.S. development work overseas, State Department employees today — from ambassadors to Civil Service experts — must be better versed and more engaged in development issues… The QDDR also focuses on the diplomatic side of effective development policy, arguing for building much stronger and more systematic links between the State Department and USAID both in Washington and in the field.”

The inaugural QDDR will focus on three areas:

  • modernizing and coordinating diplomacy across U.S. government agencies;
  • ensuring that U.S. development efforts produce a lasting and sustainable impact; and
  • creating a stronger nexus between diplomacy and development, as well as better coordination with partners in the military, in conflict zones and fragile states.

As part of the Obama Administration’s broader focus on development, Clinton references President Obama’s new development policy that was released last month, which “emphasizes the importance of targeting countries with responsible governments and favorable conditions for development and working in a smaller number of targeted sectors in each country for maximum impact.”

She also points to ongoing reforms at USAID led by Administrator Raj Shah, which are designed to make the agency “more effective, accountable, and transparent.” The reforms, called “USAID Forward,” include: changes in procurement reform that will build local capacity; evidence-based development spearheaded by USAID’s new Bureau of Policy, Planning and Learning; and a greater emphasis on science and technology to help fuel innovation.

Clinton underscores the importance of countries leading their own development, saying that the QDDR “embraces development as a process of assisted self-help in the furtherance of American interests and values.” “A developing country must be in charge and set its own goals for meeting the needs of its people,” she continues. “The U.S. government comes to the table as a partner, not a patron, lending resources and expertise and, eventually, putting itself out of business when a host country is self-sustaining.”

She goes on to talk about how development – and foreign aid dollars needed to help catalyze development – are critical to U.S. foreign policy, saying, “As counterintuitive as it may seem, the answer is that development, when done effectively, is one of the best tools to enhance the United States’ stability and prosperity.”

“It is time to move beyond the past and to recognize diplomacy and development as national security priorities and smart investments in the United States’ future stability and security… The two Ds in the QDDR reflect the world as the State Department sees it today and as it envisions it in the future.”

Top Business Leaders Call for More Effective Development

Monday, October 11th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

IGDlogo_rgb_300x120MFAN Partner the Initiative for Global Development (IGD) represents a strong alliance of business leaders and development experts committed to ending poverty.  IGD is made up of a Leadership Council co-chaired by former U.S. Secretaries of State Madeleine K. Albright and Colin L. Powell; a Frontier 100 group that connects CEOs in the developing world with CEOs in the US and Europe; and a partner network made up of over 350 business executives.   MFAN Principal Jennifer Potter is IGD’s President and CEO.

IGD offers a business perspective on why development and foreign aid reform are so important.  In a paper titled “The Business Case for Foreign Aid Reform,” IGD presents a clear argument for why aid effectiveness is critical to US business and explains how to leverage best practices of the business world in order to improve development.  The paper offers a “business plan” for foreign aid that includes:

Start with a clear strategy

  • Formulate a comprehensive national strategy for global development that outlines clear objectives and encompasses all relevant trade, aid and investment programs
  • Put someone in charge: one individual responsible for coordinating all U.S. development policies and programs, who is accountable for delivering results and who serves as a unique development voice – distinct from diplomacy and defense – in interagency discussions
  • Know your customers: design assistance efforts so that they respond to local needs and priorities

Emphasize results

  • Evaluate development outcomes rather than dollars disbursed
  • Emphasize local management: give U.S. government development staff in country the flexibility and authority to allocate resources based on their knowledge of needs on the ground
  • Find more strategic ways to collaborate with the private sector to leverage impact

Invest for success

  • Put the right team in place: rebuild the government’s core development expertise
  • Support the strategy with adequate resources: increase funding for U.S. development programs over time
  • Leverage the investments made by U.S. development agencies with private sector commitments to catalyze greater development gains

The paper goes into detail about how foreign aid can promote long-term growth, create a bigger consumer market, and spur investment and trade.  Acknowledging the current inefficiencies with the US aid system, the paper even calls for a national strategy for global development.  Read it in full here and see a few excerpts below:

“U.S. business has a core interest in the economic health of the rest of the world. Increasingly, this includes the economic development of people in poor countries.”

“By helping to create an environment where private enterprise will thrive, foreign aid is often the necessary first step in a country’s climb out of poverty and into the global marketplace. This assistance is especially important in the face of the current economic crisis, which has hit the most vulnerable hardest.”

“U.S. aid has improved the lives of millions of people by helping spur economic activity – connecting people to markets, boosting the productivity of workers, giving entrepreneurs the tools they need to scale up, and creating an environment that attracts private investment.”

“Business leaders have expertise in job creation, investment evaluation and efficient use of resources. In addition, many companies have significant experience in the developing world – producing, purchasing, selling and investing. Companies can fight poverty directly through their investments and operations, but business can also strengthen its impact on development by using its expertise and experience to advocate for improvements to U.S. aid and trade policies.”

Tim SolsoHarold McGrawPrior to the announcement of the PPD, two members of IGD’s Leadership Council, Harold McGraw and Tim Solso, wrote a blog post outlining critical reforms the Obama administration should include in its new approach to foreign aid.  They list three specific reforms that will not only create a foundation for US development policies and programs, but that will go a long way in strengthening public-private partnerships and harnessing the resources of the private sector on these issues.  The three reforms they list include:

  • Create a national strategy for global development–a principal MFAN ask;
  • Place a greater emphasis on results and outcomes, not inputs; and
  • Rebuild development expertise and invest for success

Read the full piece here and see excerpts below:

“A national strategy with clear priorities will enable the private sector – particularly businesses looking to invest – to better understand U.S. commitments to specific countries and sectors. The upcoming speech to the United Nations is a perfect opportunity to unveil the key elements of such a strategy.”

“By moving forward with these three core reforms, the Obama administration has an opportunity to build a global development strategy, based on more strategic engagement with the private sector, that expands economic opportunity abroad, raises standards of living, and brings new hope to the world’s poorest people. In turn, it will also bring countless benefits to the United States economy by creating new customers for American goods, better educated employees for American companies, and new markets for American investment in a more stable global economy.”

Harold W. McGraw, III is Chairman, President & CEO of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. and Tim M. Solso is Chairman & CEO of Cummins Inc.

10 Reasons Conservatives Must Support Aid Reform

Monday, October 11th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

mark_green_profileIn a recent series of blog posts for MFAN’s ModernizeAid blog, former Congressman Mark Green (R-WI) of the Malaria No More Policy Center lays out the Conservative case for foreign assistance reform.  Rep. Green, who also served as Ambassador to Tanzania under President George W. Bush, gives 10 reasons Conservatives should support more effective U.S. foreign assistance.  Click on the link to read the full piece on each reason:

  • Reason 1: Our current foreign aid system is organizationally incoherent.
  • Reason 2: We need to reform the system to make our precious taxpayer dollars go much further.
  • Reason 3: Foreign assistance reform is a great opportunity for Conservatives to reaffirm values and initiatives we care about.
  • Reason 4: Simply put, Conservatives (and Republicans) have a long history of standing up for EFFECTIVE foreign assistance.
  • Reason 5: The combination of fragmented authorities and overlapping bureaucracies in our current assistance framework is watering down public diplomacy efforts.
  • Reason 6: Making our foreign assistance operate as effectively as possible is a moral and ethical imperative.
  • Reason 7: The lack of coordination between our foreign assistance programs and our trade policies is hurting the effectiveness of both.
  • Reason 8: Conservatives need to ensure that our foreign assistance system recognizes, protects and builds on the enormous contributions to development being made by other-than-government sources – especially faith-based institutions.
  • Reason 9: Making our foreign assistance system more effective can help bring home our men and women in uniform – and make future deployments less necessary/minimize the need for future deployments.
  • Reason 10: Since fighting the threat of terrorism is one of this generation’s greatest challenges, we need to sharpen those tools that can help prevent violent extremism from spreading and growing.

Below are some of the most interesting and compelling points from Amb. Green’s series:

American Foreign Assistance is Pro-business

Conservatives believe, in the words of Ronald Reagan, that, “The best possible social program is a job.”  Foreign assistance, done right, can help foster conditions that strengthen consumerism, transparency, democratization and markets. It helps entrepreneurs start businesses and governments to lower trade barriers, foster innovation, and create better environments for investment. Today’s developing countries are tomorrow’s trade partners.

Foreign Assistance Protects the Homeland

Healthy societies are often the best defense against extremism. In this way, foreign assistance efforts play a crucial role within our national security strategy. We cannot fight terrorism by military means alone. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen have both called for greater support for development, diplomacy, health, and education. Foreign assistance can help prevent future Afghanistans and Somalias and keep our men and women in uniform out of harm’s way.

Aid is a Moral Obligation

Religious leaders such as Rick Warren, Billy Graham, and Pope John Paul II have long voiced their support for helping the world’s poorest. Our country’s aid infrastructure was created to ensure that America remains a good neighbor in an inter-dependent and largely poor world.

President George W. Bush was one of our era’s most eloquent proponents for foreign assistance. As he said in the aftermath of 9/11: “We fight against poverty because hope is an answer to terror. We fight against poverty because opportunity is a fundamental right to human dignity. We fight against poverty because faith requires it and conscience demands it. And we fight against poverty with a growing conviction that major progress is within our reach.” President Bush saw our prosperity as a call to action, and our power to save lives as an obligation to help lift up broken lives and empower struggling communities.  We provide economic assistance to those less fortunate because we know it is the right thing to do.

Conservatives Can Help Make Aid More Accountable and Efficient

Although there are compelling trade, national security, and moral arguments for deepening America’s commitment to foreign assistance, our aid infrastructure is in desperate need of reform.

Luckily, the Bush administration already got the ball rolling. New initiatives like the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and the Millennium Challenge Corporation are providing sustainable solutions to our most entrenched development challenges.

Moving forwards, conservatives should build on the success of these programs and work to make our entire aid system more transparent and accountable. Where redundancies exist, they should be eliminated.  Where efficiencies can be found, they should be implemented.  And where programs no longer meet our objectives, they should be ended. Sounds like a good job for Conservatives — taking sound principles of business administration and applying them to a bureaucracy in need of reform.

Conclusion

Across the world, perceptions of America are often clouded by misinformation. When young people across Africa learn that the U.S. is leading the fight against AIDS and Malaria even while we hurt economically at home, they are much more likely to trust the United States and seek closer bilateral security, trade and political relations. When entrepreneurs are given a helping hand in Turkey, or farmers are able to take advantage of a new technology, or women take out a microloan in Indonesia, we are sowing seeds for future economic and diplomatic partnerships.

Foreign assistance is not simply do-gooderism, although it certainly does considerable good. Foreign assistance projects open hearts and minds to America’s message of liberty, fairness, and free markets.  Now is the time for Conservatives to raise their voices in support of a pro-development, pro-reform foreign assistance policy.


New Report Looks at Effectiveness of Donor Aid

Tuesday, October 5th, 2010
Bookmark and Share

Today, MFAN Partners the Center for Global Development (CGD) and the Global Economy and Development project at Brookings released a new report analyzing the Quality of Official Development Assisitance or QuODA.  The report describes QuDOA as an “assessment of the quality of ODA provided by 23 countries and more than 150 aid countries.”  The analysis uses 30 indicators over four dimensions based on the international consensus on quality aid.  The four dimensions include:

  • Maximizing efficiency
  • Fostering institutions
  • Reducing Burden
  • Transparency and Learning

The report features an online interactive graph in which you can select individual donor countries and compare the effectiveness of their aid provided across the dimensions.  Ultimately, the report is aimed at measuring the effectiveness of aid in areas controlled by official donors and agencies, making it easier to reform.  The authors – CGD president Nancy Birdsall and deputy director of the Global Economic and Development project at Brookings Homi Kharas – hope to produce a new QuODA report annually.  Here more about the report on CGD’s Wonkcast here and check back later for more on this new initiative.