Third World Poverty: The Real Solution
Aid to Africa
We all welcomed the campaign to address poverty in Africa and Tony Blair's commitment to it. When it was launched, the emphasis was on reducing debt and increasing aid from the rich Western nations. The priorities stated were to tackle disease, especially aids, and to generate economic activity.
At the time Blair retired, after 10 years as prime minister, progress in terms of contributions from the West had been extremely disappointing. The debt issue has been addressed in only 25% of the countries where relief is needed, and the aid contribution (separate from debt relief) from the rich Western nations to African countries has actually fallen.
Today, much more is being done by China, while India is becoming increasingly involved. A key factor is that, unlike Western finance, the aid from China comes without strings. Because the Chinese are happy enough with the trade which flows from their involvement, they make little effort to impose their culture on the recipient countries.
Self-Defeating Conditions
Apart from its inadequate volume, aid from the Europe and the USA has limited impact because of the conditions imposed with grants; notable by the USA and the UK. An obvious absurdity is the 'no abortion' condition imposed by the Bush administration on grants to tackle aids. (Fortunately, this condition is not applied to some of the grants from the USA non government sector - for example, the Gates Foundation.)
A second restriction, more generally applied - especially by the UK - is the insistence on privatisation. The failure, in terms of value for money for the public, of Thatcher, Major and Blair governments' private finance initiatives (PFIs) does not appear to have dampened the enthusiasm for applying them to other countries.
In some African countries this has resulted in people becoming worse off than before the aid was granted. An obvious example is an increase in the cost of water as a result of privatisation. As with most privatisation, what appeared to be a short-term benefit has been more than wiped out by longer-term disadvantage.
What Must Change?
So the first change must be to remove the privatisation requirement. It is recognised, of course, that private firms which have succeeded in developing countries have valuable expertise. However, this should be used in the context of public control; control on behalf of indigenous people by leaders democratically elected to represent them. Although it has to be accepted that private firms exist to act in their own interests, as their obligations to shareholders require, they must recognise that their interests are not the priority with grant-aided projects. The most they should expect is a reasonable, commercially calculated, return.
Second, steps must be taken to ensure that a much smaller proportion of aid is devoured by consultants in the donor countries. These consultants are often involved in negotiating the grants: some are paid more for a week's work than an African's annual income. And, too often, the focus is on the trade benefits to the donor nations, rather than on the needs of the recipients.
Unless radical, and urgent, changes are made, the West will continue to lose influence in Africa. Europe and the USA will not be able to compete with China and India, or other emerging powers such as Venezuela, if they persists with trading agreements and arrangements which favour the rich nations.
A New Strategy
In terms of strategy, the most urgent change is to shift the emphasis to job creation; integrated with education and training. For the longer-term, literacy and social and political education is as necessary as training in the skills required by the jobs directly related to the projects. Too often the requirement (in the conditions imposed with the grants) to complete projects in a specified period ignores the issue of permanent benefit.
The key to bringing about real improvement for the poor is to ensure that investment is used to release the resources that the countries already have. The most important resource is the expertise that people have acquired from their life experiences. Millions of Africans have to be entrepreneurs to make enough money merely to survive: many who fail in this respect are no longer of this world.
Those who are still with us have gained valuable knowledge about the obstacles to success in their environments - and have devised strategies to overcome them. It is the habit of the West to seek to impose its own structures, rather than support the recipient countries' own organisations. A typical example was when Blair set up his African Commission, instead of supporting an African initiative: the recently formed New Partnership for Africa's Development.
Another valuable resource is, of course, the fund of knowledge accumulated by businesses which have figured out how to succeed in difficult trading circumstances. In being able to turn a profit, such enterprises have acquired valuable insights into the varying operation of markets in different countries.
Although private companies are entitled to a reasonable return for their contributions to projects, they must recognise that the projects are not run for their benefit. Thee needs of the recipients are paramount but, as the Chinese have recognised, benefits flow without the imposition of strict conditions.
In other words the focus must be on the longer-term benefits which can occur only with the involvement, on an equal basis, of the people themselves. Providing the approach is to integrate education and training with economic development, this can lead to the evolution of processes for democratic participation.
Ending Waste and Corruption
These changes would make a major contribution to ending waste and corruption. Although these are usually highlighted as problems in developing countries, they apply at least as much to agents operating on behalf of the donors. In how many cases have individuals and businesses from the donor countries become more prosperous as a result of their involvement, but have left the recipient countries poorer?
Paul Wolfowitz, the leader of the World Bank who is no longer with us, identified tackling corruption as his priority. His demise resulted from focusing on corruption in the developing world, while ignoring it closer, much closer, to home. From his words and actions, it could be concluded that he believed that the same standards should not be applied to the rich in the West as to the poor in developing countries.
The assumption in the West that the main, or in some circles entire, problem is with the developing countries is not sustainable. This is not to argue that they do not have problems of corruption, but to quote John Christenson (The Guardian 30/5/07): 'For each dollar of aid that goes into Africa, at least Five dollars flows out under the table.'
Keith Wymer
June 2007
About the Author
40 years experience in further education
manager of international projects in many countries, including USA, Russia,Denmark, South Africa.
campaigner for equality and democracy and against racism
