1 - 4 of 4
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Development assistance and counterterrorism
- Author:
- Jessica Trisko Darden
- Publication Date:
- 09-2019
- Content Type:
- Special Report
- Institution:
- American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research
- Abstract:
- US counterterrorism policy must draw on all available tools to succeed. This includes combining security, development, and humanitarian assistance when necessary to target environments that enable violent extremism to flourish. US foreign development assistance can effectively support counterterrorism efforts when centered on four pillars: (1) prioritizing local physical security, (2) responding to humanitarian need, (3) improving governance, and (4) targeting and tailoring programming to local contexts. A refined development approach to counterterrorism should more effectively target at-risk populations, address local governance concerns, and shape economic conditions in ways that support America’s counterterrorism goals.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, Terrorism, and Development Aid
- Political Geography:
- North America, Global Focus, and United States of America
3. The perils of development aid in resource-rich countries
- Author:
- Chiara Ravetti
- Publication Date:
- 03-2018
- Content Type:
- Research Paper
- Institution:
- Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute (IHEID)
- Abstract:
- The emergence of China and other new donors offering foreign assistance to mineraland land-rich African countries has spurred a renewed interest in the relationship between international aid and natural resources (Dreher and Fuchs, 2015; Dreher et al., 2018). Many low-income countries with valuable natural resources have historically received large amounts of aid from OECD donors (Fig. 1). Poor countries endowed with abundant fossil fuels or mineral reserves can have difficulties in converting their resource wealth into other forms of physical or human capital, because these subsoil assets take time to be managed, extracted and traded. Foreign aid can thus provide a complementary source of immediate liquidity for development. On the other hand, the provision of external finances has the potential to hinder political accountability, and ultimately economic development especially in countries with weak institutions.h countries
- Topic:
- Development, Humanitarian Aid, Foreign Aid, and Development Aid
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
4. After the Busan Forum: Transformation of the International Development Aid Regime
- Author:
- Taekyoon Kim
- Publication Date:
- 12-2011
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- East Asia Institute (EAI)
- Abstract:
- The 4th High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness (HLF-4) was held in Busan, South Korea from November 29 to December 1, 2011. This forum was the last of the four High Level Forums which were arranged to enhance the effectiveness of foreign aid from major donor countries led by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development-Development Assistance Group (OECD-DAC). Following the first HLF, the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness which contains specific action plans was endorsed at the second HLF. Then in 2008, the international development aid regime was finally institutionalized with the third HLF in Accra. The fourth HLF in Busan was expected to evaluate the progress made by the previous forums and to seek a comprehensive expansion of the existing international “aid” regime into a new international “development” regime. Considering that the deadline for the UN Millennium Development Goals is 2015, the Busan HLF-4 held particular significance as a rearrangement of international governance on aid effectiveness. Moreover, the Busan Forum was also a testing ground for South Korea’s soft power diplomacy which was related to the “development issues” that Seoul, during its presidency of the G20 in 2010, presented as a scheme to reduce the gap between developed and developing countries. In this context, it is important to evaluate the significance of Busan HLF-4 from the following three perspectives. Firstly, the agenda promoted most vigorously by the Busan Forum was to undertake a paradigm shift in development aid. This shift from “aid effectiveness” to “development effectiveness” encourages a multi-dimensional change in the international development aid regime. The shift reflects the international society’s efforts to desist from the conventional method of aid provision centered only on traditional donors, and to extensively and comprehensively embrace more development issues as well as a wider variety of aid providers as part of a more long-term development plan. This new concept of “development effectiveness” can also be found in the draft of the Busan Outcome Document (BOD) that was published after four successive meetings of the OECD-DAC “aid effectiveness” work team. However, if the sprawling concept of “development effectiveness” is not refined with apt and concrete principles, the Busan HLF-4 runs the risk of merely reiterating the five pillars of the Paris Declaration. Secondly, the forum was an attempt to integrate and restore the governance function of the international aid regime which is divided between the OECD-DAC-centered body of donors and the Non-OECD-DAC Donors (NODDs) that are pursuing an independent path. The so-called South-South Cooperation, consisting of NODDs such as China, India, and Brazil is widely welcomed by fragile states in Africa and East Asia for their focus on constructing infrastructure and prioritizing mutual respect and equality. This can however, disrupt the established international aid framework. The debate on aid effectiveness in 2010 predominated by the Paris Declaration regime was very much confined to the standard model of aid provision centered on DAC and its member states. Therefore, making the participation of emerging donors in the aid effectiveness commitments compulsory was a task of utmost significance at the Busan HLF-4. The involvement of the leading NODDs such as China in the Busan Forum elicited tentative hopes for an expansion of the international aid regime, and the proposition of traditional donors for South-South-North Triangular Cooperation during the forum also succeeded in expanding the point of compromise. Thirdly, another distinctive feature of the Busan HLF-4 was that it took place under the slogan of “Inclusive Partnership,” pursuing change that encourages the participation of diverse actors in the field of international development at the forum. This stood in contrast to previous forums where only the traditional donors of OECD-DAC were invited. For example, at the HLF-1 in Rome and the HLF-2 in Paris, only OECD-DAC member states, major multilateral organizations, and some partner recipient countries were invited to the forums. Civil Society Organizations (CSO) only came to be recognized as independent partners in the field of development assistance at the HLF-3 in Accra, but their proposals were still not reflected in the forum’s outcome to any substantial degree owing to the perfunctory level of their participation. The Busan HLF-4, however, embraced a much more extensive range of participants from the NODDs to civil sector participants such as CSOs and multinational corporations. This broader participation was possible because South Korea itself has experienced a successful transition from a recipient country to a donor country. With this background, South Korea could bridge the gap between recipients group and donors group. Moreover, CSOs led by Better Aid, a global organization for development cooperation, organized the “Open Forum for CSO Development Effectiveness” in the run-up to the Busan Forum. The CSOs strived to apply their policies on human rights, gender equality, and creation of healthy jobs to the Busan Outcome Document (BOD). Whether the inclusion of a diverse range of participants can bear substantive results depends on how well the demands of these actors can be reflected and translated into effective policies in the final draft of the BOD.
- Topic:
- Development, Humanitarian Aid, and Development Aid
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus