Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

New foreign aid index says little about real support for developing countries

By Helen Hughes - posted Tuesday, 3 June 2003


Because only UN peacekeeping counts, Greece, Norway and Portugal score much higher than Australia. What were we doing in East Timor. Having fun?

The last entry, the environment, disregards the debates about global warming and how to deal with it, so that signing Kyoto is the principal test. The highly tendentious nature of measuring "warming" and its tenuous relation to current, or even medium-term development is ignored. So is the use of nuclear power in France.

Closing down dirty, unsafe mines in Germany and the United Kingdom gets a big tick, while Australia's efficient coal production earns opprobrium.

Advertisement

It is irrelevant to the index that this "nasty" Australian coal creates power for jobs in India and China. A little mouse that lives off delicious crumbs in a private dining room high over 19th Street in Washington DC (centre of the aid universe) tells me that this index was cooked up over a lunch in its hearing.

The Centre for Global Development and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace are no doubt sincere in their compassion for developing countries. These NGOs believe by making taxpayers in rich countries feel guilty they can make them contribute more aid, and that more aid will lead to development.

Unfortunately, the evidence is growing that a great deal of aid is inversely related to development as it keeps dysfunctional governments in power.

The principal beneficiaries from aid are elites in developing countries. It would perhaps be going too far to say that as constructed and measured, this index of "commitment to development" is inversely related to helping developing countries, but, at least in its present form, the index should not cause Australians any embarrassment.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

Article edited by Ian Spooner.
If you'd like to be a volunteer editor too, click here.

This article first appeared in The Australian Financial Review on 20 May 2003.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Professor Helen Hughes AO is a senior fellow of the Centre for Independent Studies.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Helen Hughes
Related Links
Australian Council for Overseas Aid
Centre for Independent Studies
Photo of Helen Hughes
Article Tools
Comment Comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy