Comments on: Fallacies about aid and development

By: Patrick

Patrick — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 08:03:46 +0000

I am impressed by the diversity of comments in this topic.Some being outright ignorant,others well informed and some bordering to ignorant and arrogant.Development /underdevelopment of Africa cannot be explained by simplistic sweeping statements.As some comments have clearly outlined,its a factor of several contributors.Europe and the imperialists underdeveloped Africa through exploitation of resources for decades and distabilization of the social and economic order that had existed for centuries.After a century of control,these countries emerged from colonialism with a confused hybrid of traditional and western ideals.The education provided by the colonizers was selective,subjective and meant to convert the Africans to puppets/Subjects of their former colonizers and to further their interests through serving them.The monetary economy introduced was confusing and created poverty as Africans were turned into labourers in the imperialists farms and industries.It was inadequate to manage and sustain the systems introduced by the imperialists and especially to manage modern Economies.Not to belabour the point much,let me just state afew facts from an African point of view.Aid alone in Africa might not alleviate poverty and suffering.It needs to be combined with appropriate education and training to ensure its relevance.Except for humanitarian Aid,the rest should be channelled towards building longterm institutions that are appropriate for the African settings.Its not a question of whether to channel it through government or through NGOs but also a question of what is functioning at that particular place and time.Thorough research must be undertaken to establish what people view as development from an African point of view as Africa is as diverse as its people from one country to the other.Generalizations are almost a crime.Some countries are so advanced in education/infrastructure,Health/Governance etc etc.Some are still living in the bushes of Kalahari desert(bushmen).All Africans are not incompetent,hopeless and ignorant.Some are well incorporated to the world economy and are living good lifestyles in urban cities.Others are still traditionalist,ignorant,illiterate and absolutely poor.A chain is as strong as its weakest point.The world has every obligation to uplift the poorest from absolute poverty and suffering.This could be in transfer of technology,Foreign direct investments,opening of markets,Increased aid and also demand for better governance and accountability for donor aid.More say for the locals in their developoment projects is also important so as to discover what Africans value as development and not what the donors think is development.

By: Dave C

Dave C — Fri, 10 Jun 2005 23:59:38 +0000

That’s very well done. Fair play for compiling this.

By: Our word is our weapon

Our word is our weapon — Fri, 10 Jun 2005 23:29:04 +0000

Fallacies about aid and development: your cut-out-and-keep guide

In this superb* post, Owen Barder lists and dismantles 13 common fallacies about aid and development. Two highlights for me: Fallacy 5. Extra aid in Africa could not be absorbed: it would just be wasted. Aid to Africa per person…

By: Squander Two

Squander Two — Wed, 08 Jun 2005 11:01:46 +0000

> Donors refuse to make aid predictable, so it cannot be invested over a number of years and has to be spent as soon as it is available.

Unlike, say, loans. Loans are stable and predictable and perfect for investment. Businesses and governments use them all the time, with great effectiveness. Would you like to see more loans given to the Third World, Owen?

Owen says:
a. Loans from the World Bank etc are not long term and predictable.

b. Many of the investments do not yield fiscal returns, or do so only in the very long run (think of public investment in education, for example) and so do not provoide a stream of revenues with which loans can be repaid.

c. If rich countries invest now in developing countried with grants, we will be handsomely repaid, for example through the benefits of more trade.

So I am not in favour of adding to the debt burden of developing countries. And I am in favour of increasing the productivity of the aid we give by making it more predictable and so enabling it to be better spent.

By: Mark T

Mark T — Wed, 08 Jun 2005 07:38:38 +0000

Anybody reading this post who is broad minded enough to consider the possibility that there may be a counter-argument (or indeed that Tim is being set up as a straw man) should read his detailed reply to this over on his blog

By: EU Rota

EU Rota — Tue, 07 Jun 2005 19:43:10 +0000

EU Blogs: Stirring the Pot

There is a nice little catfight possibly brewing between Tim Worstall and someone called “Owen.”

It seems as though Owen (a self-described “left of center Guardian reader”) has put words in Tim’s mouth in regards to government hand-outs to deve…

By: Tim Worstall

Tim Worstall — Tue, 07 Jun 2005 14:31:50 +0000

Fame, Fame At Last!

So I get accused of being stupid, prejudiced and a liar, even a reactionary, all in one post. I plead guilty to all of those sins, although not for the reasons enumerated. I am indeed behind the knowledge curve on