Towards a fresh start in measuring gender equality: A contribution to the debate

Both the Gender-related Development Index (GDI) and the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) represent a ‘‘false start’’ in measuring gender equality. This is because they do not measure gender (in)equality as such, but an odd combination of absolute welfare levels and gender equality that is not easy to interpret. This note argues that the United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Report Office should take the lead in either constructing a new index for measuring gender equality or elaborating a revised GDI and revised GEM that do measure gender equality. Detailed recommendations are given for both possibilities on how this can be done, partly on the basis of a brief review of alternatives presented in the literature

Debt relief and Development: The case of the 2005 debt relief agreement with Nigeria

In 1999 Nigeria became a democracy again after a long period of dictatorship. One of the top priorities for the newly elected President Obasanjo was to clear the huge foreign debt that the country had built up in previous decades. Most of this debt was with bilateral official creditors, united in the so-called Paris Club.1 But debt relief to Nigeria was controversial. Although the country has a low income, it has large oil reserves with which it should be able to pay its debt. Furthermore, the country is notorious for its corruption and for irresponsible economic policies

Gender and poverty reduction strategy processes in Latin America

In 1999, countries that wished to qualify for the Enhanced Initiative for the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC initiative) had to elaborate Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP) and had to do so with participation of civil society. Since then, the elaboration and subsequent implementation of PRSs (Poverty Reduction Strategies)have been seen as a tool for the international donor community to guarantee that not only debt relief, but also aid in general would be spent well. The aim of this paper is to investigate the extent to which gender has been incorporated in these processes. It analyzes the contribution of the PRS process to promoting gender equity in policies to reduce poverty and in strengthening the women’s movement

Revisiting UNDP’s GDI and GEM: Towards an alternative

There are two reasons why it is important to have a good measure of gender equality in countries or regions. One is that it is important in itself: countries or regions want to compare their achievements in this area with those of other countries. The second is that such a measure can be used to assess the relationship between gender equality and economic development. In 1995, UNDP has developed two composite indices of gender equality, the Gender-related Development Index (GDI) and the Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM). The paper reviews and extends conceptual and methodological critiques of not only the GDI, but also the GEM – the latter has thus far largely been neglected in the literature. The paper then goes on to develop an alternative composite measure of gender equality that draws on the good aspects of GDI and GEM, but attempts to avoid their methodological weaknesses

A. larger pie through a fair share? : gender equality and economic performance

Is gender equality of influence on economic development? Based on insights from feminist macroeconomics, the paper develops a framework that suggests that the gendered distribution of the pie does matter for its size. However, in order to assess the relationship, we need a good measure of gender equality that is not influenced by absolute levels of development. The often-used composite indices developed by UNDP, GDI and GEM, suffer from conceptual and methodological weaknesses which are analysed in this paper. The paper then goes on to develop an alternative composite measure of gender equality. Finally, some first attempts are made to examine the relationship with economic development

The New Aid Paradigm: A Case of Policy Incoherence

From around 2000 onwards, donors and recipient governments embarked upon a new aid paradigm. The most important elements include increased selectivity in the aid allocation, more ownership of recipient countries based on nationally elaborated Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs), and more don or alignment and harmonisation via program-based approaches such as budget support. The paper assesses the theoretical merits of this new paradigm, identifying some contradictions and limitations, and then examines its implementation over the past decade and its results. The empirical literature largely confirms the earlier identified weaknesses and limitations. The paper concludes with some suggestions for improving aid practices

Paradoxes around good governance

Good governance is not a new concept Ambrogio Lorenzetti made his frescoes on good and bad governance already in the years 1338-1340 They can be viewed in the Palazzo Publicco on one of the most beautiful squares of the world, the Piazza del Campo in Siena, Italy I assume many of you have been there Good governance is represented by a king on his throne surrounded by many virtues Bad governance is represented by the devil, and justice has been bound The fresco depicting the conse - quences of good governance shows an orderly and happy life People pay taxes, and many people are engaged in productive and cultural activities The city state of Siena itself served as model for this condition of good governance, and Siena can be rec - ognized on the fresco The frescoes on the consequences of bad governance are less well remained But the overwhelming image is one of death and destruction Houses are burning, nobody is working on the land Lorenzetti’s frescoes were innovative in his time, especially for painting a humanistic and not religious topic (Korsten, 2010

Rejoinder

I want to begin by thanking Göran Holmqvist and Karin Metell Cueva for financing (on behalf of Sida) our independent research of the PRS processes in Latin America in the first place, and now in particular for taking up the challenge to respond to my doubts and criticisms of the PRS approach. They recognise that this approach has been too optimistic and, in particular, that too many goals have been attached to one single instrument. The proposal they put forward is interesting and worth discussing. I share their concerns about the continuing poverty and inequality in Latin America and agree that donors should focus their efforts on trying to reduce them. But I wonder whether their proposed solution to the shortcomings of the PRS approach is really so different from current practice

The new aid paradigm: A case of policy incoherence

Introduction At the end of the 1990s there was widespread disappointment with aid and with what aid had achieved. Poverty was still rampant, and growth rates in many poor countries were still low, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. The lack of coherence with other policies of the rich countries, in particular trade, migration and security policies and the negative effects of the war on drugs are important factors in explaining the possible lower aid effectiveness. This paper, however, focuses on the lack of coherence within aid policies, and examines in particular the new aid paradigm that was adopted around the year 2000. The disappointment about what aid had achieved led to several new initiatives at the turn of the millennium. There was broad consensus that aid levels should increase, and that aid should be more focused on poverty reduction. The international community adopted the Millennium Development Goals in order to focus development efforts on achieving concrete results. Several summits confirmed commitments to increase the level of aid, for example the 2002 Monterrey Conference and the 2005 Gleneagles G8 summit. In 1999, the initiative for the Heavily Indebted Poor countries (HIPC) was expanded, making larger amounts of debt relief accessible to more countries

Budget support, Poverty and Corruption: A Review of the Evidence

Around the year 2000, budget support was considered to be the effective and often preferred aid modality. Used at the discretion of recipient governments, normally accompanied with policy dialogue, budget support is arguably the aid instrument that best complies with the principles of aid effectiveness. Following Swedish government priorities, it increased up to 2008. However, after that it decreased dramatically and by 2016, no general budget support was provided by Sweden. A similar change is apparent in the aid portfolio of other donor countries. Budget support has an important role to play in the debate on effectiveness and harmonization of development aid, not least at the European level. In many cases, budget support is the preferred modality by partner country governments (see, for example, EBA 2016:09). It is based on trust and ownership and avoids parallel structures and processes by using recipient countries’ systems. It has been considered to have low transaction costs, coordination gains and a potential to strengthen dialogue with poor countries' governments. However, while having strong supporters and backing in international agreements, it has also been depicted as risky and fostering corruption. Thus, budget support is controversial among Swedish policy makers as well as in the public debate. In this review of evidence, Professor Geske Dijkstra shows that the decline in budget support to a large extent is explained by factors in donor countries rather than by lack of evidence on effectiveness or limitations in its possibilities to reduce poverty. The author concludes that budget support has contributed to non-income poverty reduction and that its resources, and sometimes the dialogue as well, have facilitated more expenditure for the priority sectors. “This has led to more class rooms, more drug availability, and more staff for education and health. In turn, this has contributed to higher school enrolment rates, to more gender equality in access to primary education, to more access to health services, and more access to water and sanitation. In some countries, access to secondary education significantly improved as well. In many countries there were also improvements in outcomes such as 2 primary school completion rates, immunization rates, infant and child mortality rates, and maternal mortality rates”. In addition, “contrary to the many expectations on the high fiduciary risks of budget support, there is no evidence that it increased corruption”. The review demonstrates how challenging it has been for the donor community to uphold the aid effectiveness principles in the light of political opinions and considerations in donor countries. Often withdrawal of budget support has been used as an, ineffective, puni