276 research outputs found
An end to Nordic exceptionalism? Europeanisation and Nordic development policies
The Nordic countries have traditionally been praised for their generous and advanced development policies. Recently, however, it has been claimed that the Nordic model has faded: that the Nordic donors have become more similar to other European donors. One possible reason for such trends is influences from EU policies, that is, Europeanisation. This article critically evaluates such claims by presenting arguments for and against Europeanisation effects. We argue that changes have indeed taken place. The Nordic exceptionalism has been eroded. At the same time, a convergence of European aid policies has occurred. The question is if this is the consequence of Europeanisation â or is it rather a result of Nordicisation (the Nordic countries influencing the EU), or perhaps like-mindisation (a broader set of progressive member states having impact upon EU policies)? We suggest that Europeanisation has been extremely weak while there is strong evidence of Nordicisation but also, and increasingly, of like-mindisation. Today, a core group of mainly northern member states, including the Nordics, are the main driving forces behind European aid convergence
The Impact and Design of the MDGs: Some Reflections
The MDGs appear to have been more influential than most other attempts at international target?setting in the field of development, at least at the level of international discourse. But has this translated into impact on either development policy or resource allocation, and if so has the impact been constructive or not? And what lessons does this suggest for any future target?setting proposals
Providing basic services under siege: Preliminary insights from interim councils and medical providers in besieged urban areas of Syria
Humanitarian aid as an integral part of the European Union's external action: the challenge of reconciling coherence and independence
The article focuses on the European Union's (EU) humanitarian aid policy. It addresses the challenge for the EU to deliver independent humanitarian aid while simultaneously seeking to establish more coherence between its external policies. The article examines how the EU tries to reconcile these potentially conflicting policy goals, both de jure and in practice. Empirically, it explores the interaction between EU humanitarian aid and development cooperation, the Common Foreign and Security Policy, and trade policy. While the independence of the humanitarian aid delivery is, for the most part, not being undermined, it remains difficult to establish positive synergies with other external policies because of institutional hurdles and legal constraints, as well as political obstacles and operational incompatibilities
Introduction: Why Reflect Collectively on Capacities for Change?
âCapacity developmentâ implies a promise of growing self?reliance, national ownership and sustainability, yet practice seems consistently to fall short of this emancipatory promise. This introduction argues for a reframing of capacity development for emancipatory social change. Articles in this IDS Bulletin show how understanding and practice must engage with complexity, appreciate the importance of specific culture and context, and continually address the role of power in shaping relationships, understandings and practices. Values and leadership are fundamental drivers of capacity development processes. This IDS Bulletin argues against a deficit approach based on linear causal logic and replicable âbest practiceâ. Instead, practitioners are encouraged to develop a detailed understanding of the culture and dynamics of specific contexts, to detect energies for positive change and work to connect and facilitate them. Learning is at the centre of the approach. Capacity development is understood as a collective process of learning in action for social change. Support for capacity development processes demands a critical development practice that implies mutual learning, with an emphasis on reflective and experiential approaches. However, this reframing implies enormous challenges for development practice, and therefore considerable personal and organisational commitment
Introduction: Aid?effectiveness, Prisoners' Dilemmas, and Country Allocations
SUMMARY In theory â and in project and country experience â aid has proved its potential to stimulate growth, and sometimes to reduce poverty. But the record has been worsening, for four reasons. First, donors' self?interest impedes their attempts to help recipients to improve policy. Second, each donor (and each recipient ministry), in pursuing its own interests, damages the total performance of aid. Third, the recent shifts from project to programme aid require better support with manpower training, and subtler concepts of âpolicy dialogueâ. Finally, the growing scandal of country aid allocations needs attention. SOMMAIRE Introduction: l'efficacitĂ© de l'aide, les dilemmes de prisonnier, et l'allocation par pays En thĂ©orie â et en pratique (des projets et des pays) â l'aide a dĂ©montrĂ© le potentiel de stimuler la croissance, et a parfois rĂ©duit la pauvretĂ©. Mais la situation s'est dĂ©tĂ©riorĂ©e pour quatre raisons. D'abord, le propre intĂ©rĂȘt des donneurs mine leurs efforts d'aider les pays recevants Ă amĂ©liorer leurs politiques. En second lieu, chaque donneur (et chaque ministĂšre rĂ©cipient), en agissant selon ses propres intĂ©rĂȘts, amoindrit les rĂ©sultats totaux de l'aide. TroisiĂšmement, la rĂ©orientation rĂ©cente de l'aide aux projets, vers de l'aide aux programmes, exige une soutenance amĂ©liorĂ©e, et des concepts plus raffinĂ©s de dialogue de la politique. Enfin, il faut tirer l'attention sur le scandal aggrandissant de l'allocation de l'aide par pays. RESUMEN IntroducciĂłn: Efectividad de la ayuda, dilemas de los prisioneros y distribuciĂłn por paises En teorĂa, asĂ como en la experiencia relativa a proyectos y a paĂses, la ayuda ha probado su potencialidad para estimular el crecimiento y, a veces, para reducir la pobreza. No obstante, los impactos positivos de la ayuda han ido menguando debido a cuatro razones. Primero, los intereses propios de los donantes interfieren sus intentos para ayudar a mejorar las polĂticas a los receptores. Segundo, cada donante (y cada ministerio receptor) al perseguir su propio interĂ©s, daña el resultado total de la ayuda. Tercero, los cambios recientes de la ayuda de proyectos a programas, requieren de un mejor apoyo que implica entrenamiento en capacitaciĂłn y el concepto sutil âdiĂĄlogo sobre politicasâ. Finalmente, el creciente escĂĄndalo sobre la asignaciĂłn de la ayuda por paĂses, requiere atenciĂłn
"More money for health - more health for the money": a human resources for health perspective
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>At the MDG Summit in September 2010, the UN Secretary-General launched the Global Strategy for Women's and Children's Health. Central within the Global Strategy are the ambitions of "more money for health" and "more health for the money". These aim to leverage more resources for health financing whilst simultaneously generating more results from existing resources - core tenets of public expenditure management and governance. This paper considers these ambitions from a human resources for health (HRH) perspective.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Using data from the UK Department for International Development (DFID) we set out to quantify and qualify the British government's contributions on HRH in developing countries and to establish a baseline.. To determine whether activities and financing could be included in the categorisation of 'HRH strengthening' we adopted the Agenda for Global Action on HRH and a WHO approach to the 'working lifespan' of health workers as our guiding frameworks. To establish a baseline we reviewed available data on Official Development Assistance (ODA) and country reports, undertook a new survey of HRH programming and sought information from multilateral partners.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In financial year 2008/9 DFID spent ÂŁ901 million on direct 'aid to health'. Due to the nature of the Creditor Reporting System (CRS) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) it is not feasible to directly report on HRH spending. We therefore employed a process of imputed percentages supported by detailed assessment in twelve countries. This followed the model adopted by the G8 to estimate ODA on maternal, newborn and child health. Using the G8's model, and cognisant of its limitations, we concluded that UK 'aid to health' on HRH strengthening is approximately 25%.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In quantifying DFID's disbursements on HRH we encountered the constraints of the current CRS framework. This limits standardised measurement of ODA on HRH. This is a governance issue that will benefit from further analysis within more comprehensive programmes of workforce science, surveillance and strategic intelligence. The Commission on Information and Accountability for Women's and Children's Health may present an opportunity to partially address the limitations in reporting on ODA for HRH and present solutions to establish a global baseline.</p
Taking the MDGs Beyond 2015: Hasten Slowly
The authors advise to hasten slowly in defining the successor framework to the MDGs. The review of progress in 2010 should not be intermingled with the intergovernmental discussions about the post?2015 framework. The latter should not start until a UN panel of Eminent Persons has prepared a set of thoughtful options and suggestions. The worst decision would be to keep the same MDGs and add new Goals and more Targets. The panel will have to address the following topics: (a) new structure; (b) new Targets; (c) collective nature of global Targets; (d) type of benchmarks; (e) new time horizon; and (f) disaggregated monitoring. The world will miss the MDGs largely because disparities within the majority of countries have grown to the point of slowing down national progress. In order to overcome the âtyranny of averagesâ, this article proposes a method of incorporating equity in national statistics
- âŠ