What are the impacts of aid on receivin
Aid can have the opposite effect from that which is intended.
For example, in Swaziland between 2000 and 2010, up to
two-thirds of the 1.2 million population has relied on donor
food assistance. Between 1970 and 1990 life expectancy
rose from 48 to 61 but by 2012 it was back to 48. The
population has been weakened by HIV/AIDS and other HIV-
related disease. The United Nations' World Food Programme
supplied relief food during emergency situations and food
directly to the government during non-emergency times. This
led some farmers to think that they would always be supplied
and they became dependent on the aid. The market for local
produce is also damaged. More recently the United Nation's
World Food Programme and other organisations have been
moving away from food distribution towards programmes of
encouraging self-sufcient food production.
Recipients of donated western clothing will not buy clothing
from local producers, putting them out of business
It is cheaper to use local expertise rather than expensive overseas consultants, engineers, etc.
In the USA the law requires food aid to be spent on buying food in the USA - so half of what is spent is used on transport - tying aid increased the cost of aid by 15-30%.
Giving cash/cash vouchers instead of imported goods is a cheaper, more efficient way to deliver aid.
Counterproductive conditions on aid
The World Bank and IMF attach conditions to loans such as the elimination of state subsidies and the privatisation of services. This might mean that local people cannot afford goods such as fertilisers.
Subsidies are given to producers in HICs such as EU agricultural subsidies. This subsidy might be greater in value than that of the aid provided to the LIC.
Fragmentation increases bureaucracy
The large number of government organisations and NGOs involved leads to overlap and inefficiency as time is spent in coordinating the work of different organisations.
Donor institutions make proposals for aid projects to recipient countries who make a plan for the use of the aid.
In the health sector, aid targeted at high profile disease but it may be more effective to concentrate on more general issues
HIPC Initiative loan repayments are set too high.
Other loans lead to further debts which the country struggles to pay off.
Instead of using the countries earnings to improve the quality of life of the people, large amounts of money are being repaid to foreign banks.
Sometimes aid does not reach those who need it.
- money is paid out to fake bank accounts controlled by corrupt elites
- prices are increased for transport or warehousing
- goods are sold to the black market
The poorest countries are not a priority
Commercial and political interests means that middle income countries get more help than the poorest countries with small markets.
Debate as to how aid should be organised - argument that the top-down model does not work/being criticized so effective bottom-up strategies have been developed.
Providing aid to health sectors in LICs and the training of medical staff is hindered by migration policies in HICs that encourage the immigration of LIC doctors and nurses.
Hi-tech aid can be a problem
E.g. tractors are expensive to run (imported fuel) and difficult to repair when they break down - local people may not have the necessary skills.