This book provides comprehensive data on the volume, origin and types of aid and other resource flows to around 150 developing countries. The data show each country's intake of Official Development Assistance, as well as other official and private funds from members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Development Assistance Committee, multilateral agencies and other key external funders. Key development indicators are given for reference.
Resource allocation and health financing
Geographical distribution of financial flows to developing countries: 2004-2008
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development: 2010
Health systems financing and the path to universal coverage
Evans DB and Etienne C: Bulletin of the World Health Organization 88: 402–403, June 2010
The authors identify two prerequisites for universal health coverage. The first is to ensure that financial barriers do not prevent people from using the services they need, such as prevention, promotion, treatment and rehabilitation. The second is to ensure that they do not suffer financial hardship because they have to pay for these services. Even with the recent increase in external funds for health in low-income countries, these countries still have to find almost 75% of their health funding in domestic sources. The way that countries raise those funds is critical. Direct payments that are required when people obtain care (e.g. user charges) prevent many people from seeking care in the first place, and may result in financial catastrophe, even impoverishment, for many. The authors recommend that, to improve universal coverage, systems need to raise the bulk of funds through forms of prepayment (e.g. taxes and/or insurance), and then pool these funds to spread the financial risk of illness across the population. Health financing systems with inbuilt incentives should ensure that these funds are used efficiently and equitably.
WHO funders: Setting the agenda for global public health?
Knowledge Ecology International: 15 May 2010
This article supplies basic information on external funding for the World Health Organization's (WHO) activities. The total amount of 'specified' voluntary contributions for the period of 2008 to 2009 is around US$2.3 billion dollars. The Total General Fund for WHO, including specified voluntary contributions, 'core' voluntary contributions and contributions to WHO's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and the Stop TB Partnership Global Drug Facility, stands at $2,744,594,186 dollars. Unofficial sources within WHO have confirmed that these voluntary contributions form around 80% of WHO’s operating budget. The main external funders have been identified as (in descending order): the United States of America, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Rotary International, Norway, Canada, the European Commission, the Global Alliance for Vaccine Immunization (GAVI) and Hoffmann-La Roche. WHO confirmed that Roche's $84 million figure relates to in-kind contributions following the H1N1 pandemic response.
A call for a massive paradigm shift from just health financing to integrated health, population and social development investment in Africa: The case for progressing from only 15% to 15%+
Sankore R: Africa Public Health Alliance, 15%+ Campaign and Africa Public Health Parliamentary Network, April 2010
This paper was presented at the African Union's (AU) Continental Conference on Maternal, Infant and Child Health in Africa from 19 to 21 April 2010. It outlines the basis for a required paradigm shift in ‘health financing’ in Africa, given the limited gains from isolated health financing and the rising health burden and mortality in 2010 since 2000. In April 2001, African Heads of State met in Abuja, Nigeria to make the continent's main financial commitment towards meeting the health Millennium Goals by pledging to allocate at least 15% of domestic national budgets to health. Yet nine years later, the pledge remains largely unmet. Broad-based social development investment is required in addition to the 15% pledge and the paper calls for investment in integrated and needs-based health, population and social development, moving from just 15% to 15%+.
Aid to Africa: What can the EU and China learn from each other?
Ling J: South African Institute of International Affairs occasional paper 56, 2010
This occasional paper focuses on China’s and the EU’s aid policies towards Africa by examining their different approaches to aid and the internal logic behind these differences in order to facilitate mutual understanding. It points out that, due to their different development stages, different development models and different aid co-operation experiences in Africa, China and the EU have developed different aid principles, priorities and modalities with different logics. China advocates more ‘co-operation’ than ‘aid’ itself, so the country’s main principles guiding the way in which it manages aid are no political conditions attached to aid provisions, two-way co-operation and a win-win formula. The EU considers aid as a one-way instrument to promote Africa’s good governance and sustainable development, so the key principles that it applies are conditionality, one-way benevolence and co-responsibility. However, the paper highlights that these different logics behind the EU’s and China’s policy approaches are not necessarily contradictory. It proposes that both sides should shift perspective, putting aside the perception of ‘competing models’, to study the points of overlap and thus open a new window for co-operation. Considering the wide perception gap that exists between the two sides, the author recommends that a practical and pragmatic way to advance co-operation may be through focusing initially on second track approaches.
Development co-operation report 2010
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development: April 2010
Members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC) gave US$121.5 billion in bilateral aid in 2009, reaching a historic high, but the gap between commitments and promises made in 2005 is widening, according to this report. In 2005 DAC external funders collectively promised to commit 0.56% of gross national income to aid by 2010, but reached just 0.31% in 2009. Though aid commitments have continued to increase, the rate of increase has dropped off in the past few years, making external funders increasingly off-track. DAC external funders gave US$27 billion to Africa in 2009, an increase of 3% on 2008, but this is still less than half of the extra aid they promised at Gleneagles in 2005. Norway, France, the UK, Korea, Finland, Belgium and Switzerland all increased their aid commitments, while Japan, Greece, Ireland, Spain and Portugal, among others, reduced theirs. The largest external funders by volume were the USA, France, Germany, the UK and Japan, but just five countries met or exceeded the UN overseas development aid target of 0.7% of national income: Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. External funders pledged to increase aid to US$130 billion by 2010; but the report predicts they will fall short by US$78 billion (both figures in 2004 US dollars).
Sector approaches: Dutch reflections from the field
Van Esch W, Gerritsen M, de Groot C, Vogels M and Boesen N: Capacity4Dev, March 2010
This paper looks first at the relevance of sector approaches and their overall effectiveness, then on the systemic challenges that they entail. This is followed by a closer look of the links between sector approaches and global agendas, and of sector approaches in fragile situations. Operational aspects, the particular challenges related to policy/political dialogue, accountability, monitoring and quality assurance are presented, and the issue of modalities – budget support, pooled funding and/or projects – is touched upon. Finally, the changing roles played by embassy staff are discussed. Although external funders are expected to respect sovereignty and not to interfere in internal affairs, this paper argues that in reality they do interfere, no matter what they do – the money they bring to the table will, no matter what, modify power structures and strengthen some actors while weakening others. The challenge is therefore to intervene in a way that does not enter into big (party) politics, but aims at strengthening the domestic sector system of politics, policies, knowledge and institutions that can bring the sector forward in a direction that fits both donor objectives and the objectives of domestic stakeholders.
The 2010 ERD report: Promoting resilience through social protection
European Report for Development: March 2010
The focus of this report is on sub-Saharan Africa because this region appears to be particularly lagging behind in the sphere of the provision of social protection, being at the same time more vulnerable than other developing areas. More people live below the poverty line, more people die of HIV or malaria, income distribution is very unequal, more people depend on volatile agriculture, the climate changes threaten to bring about more dramatic natural disasters, state institutions are often unrecognised or illegitimate, economies are less diversified and violent conflict is rife. In the aftermath of the three crises (food, fuel and financial), which in a short time span have hit the world economy, sub-Saharan Africa has little resources to react. The European Union, together with other external funders, this paper argues, should pursue a development policy that reinforces social protection and, in particular, can help sub-Saharan African countries to build resilience through social protection, and break out of vicious circles and poverty traps. However, the paper cautions that any action can interfere with ownership; furthermore, overseas development assistance can itself become a source of vulnerability if the initial commitments in terms of amounts, targets and time horizon are not fulfilled.
The sector approach version 2.0: Getting results as the world gets flatter
Van Esch W, Gerritsen M, de Groot C, Vogels M and Boesen N: Capacity4Dev, March 2010
Is the sector approach still relevant to development assistance and aid given the track record and the rapidly changing global context? Or is it time – again – to look for something new that might work better? This paper argues that the sector approach continues to be relevant, but that it needs to become a 'sector approach version 2.0'. This requires significant – and difficult - changes in how external funders work. The new approach has to make where connectivity, collaboration, communication and horizontal knowledge acquisition central to its aims. This entails addressing five closely linked challenges: accepting the complexity of the task; working proactively with the new global interconnectedness; paying more attention to knowledge, dialogue, quality and results; adapting the sector approach to the specific context and sector, particularly in fragile situations; and gaining leverage as 'brokers' of knowledge and agendas.
Twenty-first century aid: Recognizing success and tackling failure
Oxfam International: May 2010
This report examines the evidence for and against foreign aid, and finds that, while there is much room for improvement, good quality 21st century aid not only saves lives, but is indispensable in unlocking poor countries’ and people’s ability to work their own way out of poverty. It makes a number of recommendations. Countries and stakeholders should ensure aid is channelled to help support active citizens, build effective states as a pathway to reducing poverty and inequality, and support diverse forms of financing to contribute to development. They should deliver aid through a mix of models, including increasing budget support wherever possible, and ensure that a percentage of aid flows are channelled to civil society organisations, to enable people to better hold their governments to account. Also, there is a need to dramatically improve the predictability of aid, by increasing the proportion of aid that is general budget support where possible and by sector support where general budget support is not an option, and limit conditions attached to aid to mutually agreed poverty indicators. Rich countries should give at least 0.7% of their national income in aid, and set out how this target will be reached, with legally binding timetables. Furthermore, the global community should reject a culture of corruption, uphold human rights standards, and act in ways which are transparent and open to scrutiny. It should also provide legal environments in which civil society organisations monitoring government activities can flourish and respect the independence of non-government bodies like audit offices and the judiciary.