Search

Begin New Search Topic Health Author Owen Barder

1. Commitment to Development Index 2013

Author:
Owen Barder and Petra Krylová
Publication Date:
11-2013
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
The Commitment to Development Index ranks 27 of the world's richest countries on policies that affect the more than five billion people living in poorer nations. The CDI goes beyond measures of foreign aid to quantify performance in seven areas: Quantity and quality of foreign aid Openness to trade policies that encourage investment and financial transparency Openness to migration Environmental policies Promotion of international security Support for technology creation and transfer Why does the CDI matter? Because in an integrated world, the behavior of rich countries and powerful institutions can profoundly affect the lives of people in poor countries and because poverty and weak institutions in developing countries can breed public health crises, security threats, and economic crises that know no borders. Committing to policies that promote development and well-being is a global imperative: no human being should be denied the chance to live free of poverty and oppression and to enjoy a basic standard of education and health. The CDI countries all promote respect for human life and dignity; the Index looks at whether the policies of rich countries match these aspirations.
Topic:
Security, Development, Education, Health, Poverty, and Fragile/Failed State

2. A Policymakers' Guide to Dutch Disease

Author:
Owen Barder
Publication Date:
07-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
It is sometimes claimed that an increase in aid might cause Dutch Disease—that is, an appreciation of the real exchange rate which can slow the growth of a country's exports— and that aid increases might thereby harm a country's long-term growth prospects. This essay argues that it is unlikely that a long-term, sustained and predictable increase in aid would, through the impact on the real exchange rate, do more harm than good, for three reasons. First, there is not necessarily an adverse impact on exports from Dutch Disease, and any impact on economic growth may be small. Second, aid spent in part on improving the supply side—investments in infrastructure, education, government institutions and health—result in productivity benefits for the whole economy, which can offset any loss of competitiveness from the Dutch Disease effect. Third, the welfare of a nation's citizens depends on their consumption and investment, not just output. Even on pessimistic assumptions, the additional consumption and investment which the aid finances is larger than any likely adverse impact on output. However, the macroeconomic effects of aid can cause substantial harm if the aid is not sustained until its benefits are realized. The costs of a temporary loss of competitiveness might well exceed the benefits of the short-term increase in aid. To avoid doing harm, aid should be sustained and predictable, and used in part to promote economic growth. This maximizes the chances that the long-term productivity and growth benefits will offset the adverse effects—which may be small if they exist at all—that big aid surges may pose as a result of Dutch Disease.
Topic:
Economics, Health, and Humanitarian Aid
Political Geography:
Europe

3. The Costs and Benefits of Front-loading and Predictability of Immunization

Author:
Owen Barder and Ethan Yeh
Publication Date:
02-2006
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for Global Development
Abstract:
How can the international community save more children's lives faster and more effectively in the 21st century? This Working Paper analyzes the extent to which “frontloading” and predictable vaccine funding, as proposed by the International Finance Facility for Immunization (IFFIm), is more effective in impacting vaccine coverage than spending vaccine funds equally throughout the lives of projects. The IFFIm is an initiative of the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI), and supported by the governments of the United Kingdom, France, Sweden, Italy, Spain and Norway. An initial IFFIm investment of $4 billion is expected to prevent 5 million child deaths by 2015, and more than 5 million future adult deaths. Using a stylized model, the authors quantify the positive and negative effects of predictable vaccine funds and frontloading, and finds IFFIm's approach can increase the impact of vaccine coverage by 22%. This is because stable and long-term financing allows vaccine manufacturers and countries to plan for long periods of time, knowing that resources will be available. Front-loading helps to reduce the spread of disease and to immunize large groups of people faster.
Topic:
Economics, Health, Human Welfare, and International Cooperation
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Norway, France, Spain, Italy, and Sweden