Contents with tag: ODA
Examining the case of USAID in Mindanao, southern Philippines, and how development could be subsumed to military objectives at the expense of addressing roots of armed conflict.
This event will seek to provide a forum for all actors to engage and contribute to the modernisation of ODA with a particular focus on blended ﬁnance.
As the first of three major development conferences this year, the Third International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD3) in Addis Ababa is expected to play a fundamental role in laying the financial groundwork both for the post-2015 development agenda and the climate negotiations. With the current state of negotiations, however, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda (Addis Action Agenda) signals a retreat of ambition and is far from upholding Monterrey and Doha, and much less in delivering any adequate response to the needs of the poor and the marginalized.
The Agenda For Change, first unveiled in 2011 and approved in May 2012, will determine European Union (EU)’s development policy in the coming years. It is an attempt to improve EU poverty reduction efforts by making its development assistance “more strategic, targeted and results-oriented”.“Impact” has become a buzzword among European development officials but issues that plague European development cooperation over the years call to question whether or not the new overseas aid policy can indeed bring about real transformation in the lives of the poor in Asia & the Pacific.
IBON International Statement for the First session of the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing
Remarks made at the side event, “Right at Rio+20: A Rights-based Framework for Sustainable Development” organized by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, The Missions of Germany, Maldives and Norway with Ibon International, the Center for International Environmental Law and The Council of Canadians, in collaboration with the UNDG-HRM. April 27, 2012. UN Headquarters, New York
This primer reviews the history of ODA since World War II and identifies the major problems with the aid system. It reveals the yawning gap between aid rhetoric and aid practice. It also argues that current donor-led efforts to improve "aid effectiveness" fail to grapple with power asymmetries in aid relationships. The primer challenges the premises, priorities and the configuration of aid partnerships at present. It sketches an agenda for transforming the international aid architecture from one that serves the interests of elites in the North and South, to one that ensures the progressive realization of the human rights of the poor and the marginalized.
Since the World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong in 2005, ‘Aid for Trade’ (AfT) has become the new catchphrase in international development to foster and promote trade and liberalization. Originating from the 2001 ‘Doha Development Round’, the WTO reasons: “Aid for Trade aims to help developing countries, particularly least developing countries, develop trade-related skills and infrastructure that is needed to implement and benefit from WTO agreements and to expand their trade”[i]. As such, the framework is complementing WTO trade reform and market opening by focusing on capacity building, particularly on trade policy and regulation and improving trade-related infrastructure to ease supply side bottlenecks.
Since the 1980s, multilateral development banks (MDBs), donor agencies, development finance institutions and governments have increasingly promoted private sector growth as the cornerstone of national development strategies. While there is little in depth and up to date analysis on the relationship between ODA and the private sector due to a lack or differences in reporting, the vast majority of bilateral and multilateral donors have considerably increased their focus and engagement with the private sector.