10 Ways to Change Africa

sourdough

I have just finished a pretty insightful book by an author named Robert Calderisi called "The Trouble With Africa: Why Foreign Aid isn't Working". It's a pretty good book though I disagree with some of his ideas and conclusions. Anyway, he has a chapter that proposes 10 ways to change (fix) Africa that I found very intriguing. My primary interest is in regards to international development and feel passionately about helping a continent that has seen very few bright moments.

1) Introducing mechanisms for tracing and recovering public funds.
This approach would resemble the ways we track funds to terrorists and would allow more transparency and the ability to monitor where money is going primarily to prevent it from winding up in private bank accounts. In theory this is a good idea, but I"m not sure treating leaders like criminals rather than as partners is a good way of fostering good will. Otherwise good leaders may label this as imperialism and may continue the patronizing attitude that prevails.

2) Require all head of state, ministers and officials to open their bank accounts to public scrutiny.
I prefer this one to solution #1.

3) Cut direct aid to countries in half
This one is very controversial. Less aid is argued to be better b/c there is less to waste as each dollar becomes more valuable. Also, this will reduce dependancy on aid and encourage real development. I worry that cutting aid (though may be better in the long run) will result in the suffering and deaths of many, many more who NEED that aid IMMEDIATELY. I'm not sure when the ends justify the means.

4) Focus direct aid to 5 countries that are serious about reducing poverty
Choose 5 countries with good records and give them all the aid. This will create islands of stability which will spread to outlying areas. When they "develop" enough, they will no longer receive aid and the money will be focussed on the next country. My question is how and WHO decides which are good gov'ts. I see way too many possibilities of money being directed to corrupt officials who are friendly to donor countries.

5)Require all countries to hold internationally supervised elections.
Sounds good to me.

6) Promote other aspects of democracy (free press and independant judiciary)
No complaint here

7)Supervise the running of African schools and HIV/AIDS programs
I'm ok with HIV programs but I don't trust that westerners will know how to run an African school without compromising cultural sensitivity and without a strict economic agenda.

8) Establish citizen review groups to oversee Gov't policy and aid agreements.
Also a good idea.

9) Emphasize transport links and infrastructure
Also a good idea but at the expense of food aid or other more immediate needs that are preventing deaths NOW? This would help development in the long term with trading possibilities but there needs to be a balance b/w elleviating immediate suffering with long term goals

10 Merge the World Bank, IMF and the UN Development Programme.

No complaints here.

What do you guys think?

tybird

Great ideas....but....I can hear the complaints now....this would probably be called "neo-colonialism" by those who's Swiss bank accounts might be affected by these measures.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

i'll take care of it. thanks

Commy

MrSmith wrote:

i'll take care of it. thanks

seems such a serious matter requires a more sincere response, even though 3 is bogus.

sourdough

No other thoughts??? The cynic in me thinks that nothing gets done because nobody really cares. No disrespect as there are many people here who are very socially aware and are doing great things in different causes but I hear a lot of people talk of concern of poverty but Africa seems to be a topic nobody really wants to seriously discuss, yet I think we can probably agree it is one of the most desperate places on earth and has been so for some time.

farfromglorified

1) Introducing mechanisms for tracing and recovering public funds.[/quote]

This is a good idea.

2) Require all head of state, ministers and officials to open their bank accounts to public scrutiny.

This is an idiotic idea. They'll just hide the money elsewhere.

3) Cut direct aid to countries in half

This is insane. Anytime I see an arbitrary number like this ("half"), I get highly suspicious. If anything, Africa needs 20-30 times what the world is currently giving, not less.

Rather than cutting direct aid "in half", we should set hard aid goals and cut any aid that simply isn't working. Pouring money into abstinence-only plans, foreign food distribution, and the numerous other programs that accomplish nothing in terms of African self-dependence is a complete waste and that money should be redirected. But to simply cut aid "in half" robs programs that are having a positive impact.

4) Focus direct aid to 5 countries that are serious about reducing poverty

This, I dig, at least in theory. Trying to save a continent, let alone even a country, is stupid. African aid needs to be much better focused on populations that are going to use it proactively. We need to take an investment approach and such approach expects returns. This doesn't mean we should be expecting to be repaid for any aid we grant. It simply means we should expect the situation tomorrow to have progressed from where it is today, as opposed to simply maintaining some kind of awful stasis.

5)Require all countries to hold internationally supervised elections.

This is not terribly wise. Some of these nations simply won't do this or will attempt to cheat. Should we then simply punish the people? I don't think so.

6) Promote other aspects of democracy (free press and independant judiciary)

That's really not our business. Too much nation-building here, though the goals are certainly admirable.

7)Supervise the running of African schools and HIV/AIDS programs

Your reservations here were spot-on. As it stands today, we'd have Laura Bush in there telling a bunch of African women not to sleep with their husbands when they really don't have much of a choice.

Better would be to help fund HIV/AIDS programs that work in existing schools or via NGOs.

8) Establish citizen review groups to oversee Gov't policy and aid agreements.

Too biased. This would simply turn into bickering about the entire premise of giving aid in the first place. I certainly think citizens should have input in terms of whether or not their money should be used, but once things are in motion it's better to leave it to the experts.

9) Emphasize transport links and infrastructure

Meh. Again, this is good in theory, but transport links and infrastructure need to come online with utilization. What good is building a $50B highway if only a few trucks are using it? This kind of infrastructure needs to be part of a much broader plan associated with primarily promoting agriculture.

10 Merge the World Bank, IMF and the UN Development Programme.


Better yet, get rid of them or ignore them completely. These organizations have done more harm than good in Africa.

polaris

#10 is critical ... those agencies are pawns for multi-nationals ...

having been to africa - really, getting rid of the corruption is the big thing ... also, maybe creating some study to see the impacts of a colonial divided continent where a plethora of tribal groups exist ...

farfromglorified

Here are some other ideas:

Stop fixating on those infected with HIV/AIDS and start fixating on those without HIV/AIDS
The fact of the matter is that lots of people in Africa have AIDS and are going to die. You can either spend a whole lot of money trying in a largely failed attempt to save these people, or you can make significant investments in those who are not infected and are able to add net increases in value into society as opposed to net consumptions from society.

Don't forget about family planning
Family planning programs are a cheap way to help relieve the pressures of population growth. Stop moralizing and start using programs that work!

Treat AID as a business, not a charity
Stop being self satisfied because you gave an African kid some food. Chances are that African kid is going to turn into ten African kids who also need food and you've done more harm than good. Rather than operating from guilt, start operating from a position where you expect aid not to make you feel better but rather expect aid to make sustainable positive changes on the ground. Saving a kid from starvation today is relatively pointless. Contributing to the creation of a high-yield farm staffed by educated locals or to a school that is providing people with usable skills or to a trade shop that employs people, however, is amazingly powerful.

Ignore the "crises"
Africa is a land of crises. Every week there's a new war, a new drought, a new outbreak, a new famine. Too often our aid is tied to a knee-jerk reaction to these crises instead of the ever-existent underlying situations that create them.

There are many other great ideas out there and in my head...wish I had more time on this and I'll come back.

farfromglorified

polaris wrote:

#10 is critical ... those agencies are pawns for multi-nationals ...

having been to africa - really, getting rid of the corruption is the big thing ... also, maybe creating some study to see the impacts of a colonial divided continent where a plethora of tribal groups exist ...

This is a great point...something we're also ignoring in the Middle East. Citizens of these nations are still suffering the foolishness of their European map-makers and we should greet independence efforts with interest, not skepticism.

farfromglorified

Fuck it...couple more I want to get out there:

Do not stand in the way of African industry
For god's sake, do not subject these nations to the economic idiocy of debt repayments, trade sanctions, international patent regulation, outsourcing taxes and all the other protectionist stupidity that gets thrown around by the IMF, World Bank, and domestic politicians. African leaders will do enough stupid things economically -- they don't need our help there.

Can the "globalization" rhetoric
Before opening your mouth and spouting out some bullshit about "globalization", at least try to think for a minute. When a company outsources jobs, those jobs are being given to someone. And, yes, sometimes that someone is working for a wage you find to be completely insane and hours that would kill you. However, more often than not, that person took that job willingly and is better off because of it. There are places in African that globalization is already reshaping very much for the better. Instead of damning globalization in general, simply help spread the word about the companies that are committing abuses. Don't just assume they all are.

Stop injecting your domestic concerns into African politics or culture or progress
If Kenya suddenly starts outputting a whole lot of CO2 as a result of development, try not to go crazy. Too much foreign aid is now tied into insane environmental policies that effectively make good plans completely cost-ineffective. A Kenyan village that uses a coal power plant to power modern cooking stoves instead of using incredibly harmful charcoal pits is a step forward, not backwards. It may not be ideal, but it's still good. Same holds for stupid moralizing about African sexual habits, African hunting choices, or even African attitudes towards property and other indviduals.

Get rid of the missionaries
Please, please, please don't send any more fucking religion to Africa. They're all stocked up, thanks.

Punish nefarious acts by domestic companies
On the flip side of #2 above -- punish domestic firms that violate property rights or human rights in these nations. If Coca-cola or Pfizer is using Africa as a dumping ground, help these nations hold them accountable as opposed to protecting them.

tybird

farfromglorified wrote:

1) Introducing mechanisms for tracing and recovering public funds.

This is a good idea.

2) Require all head of state, ministers and officials to open their bank accounts to public scrutiny.

This is an idiotic idea. They'll just hide the money elsewhere.

3) Cut direct aid to countries in half

This is insane. Anytime I see an arbitrary number like this ("half"), I get highly suspicious. If anything, Africa needs 20-30 times what the world is currently giving, not less.

Rather than cutting direct aid "in half", we should set hard aid goals and cut any aid that simply isn't working. Pouring money into abstinence-only plans, foreign food distribution, and the numerous other programs that accomplish nothing in terms of African self-dependence is a complete waste and that money should be redirected. But to simply cut aid "in half" robs programs that are having a positive impact.

4) Focus direct aid to 5 countries that are serious about reducing poverty

This, I dig, at least in theory. Trying to save a continent, let alone even a country, is stupid. African aid needs to be much better focused on populations that are going to use it proactively. We need to take an investment approach and such approach expects returns. This doesn't mean we should be expecting to be repaid for any aid we grant. It simply means we should expect the situation tomorrow to have progressed from where it is today, as opposed to simply maintaining some kind of awful stasis.

5)Require all countries to hold internationally supervised elections.

This is not terribly wise. Some of these nations simply won't do this or will attempt to cheat. Should we then simply punish the people? I don't think so.

6) Promote other aspects of democracy (free press and independant judiciary)

That's really not our business. Too much nation-building here, though the goals are certainly admirable.

7)Supervise the running of African schools and HIV/AIDS programs

Your reservations here were spot-on. As it stands today, we'd have Laura Bush in there telling a bunch of African women not to sleep with their husbands when they really don't have much of a choice.

Better would be to help fund HIV/AIDS programs that work in existing schools or via NGOs.

8) Establish citizen review groups to oversee Gov't policy and aid agreements.

Too biased. This would simply turn into bickering about the entire premise of giving aid in the first place. I certainly think citizens should have input in terms of whether or not their money should be used, but once things are in motion it's better to leave it to the experts.

9) Emphasize transport links and infrastructure

Meh. Again, this is good in theory, but transport links and infrastructure need to come online with utilization. What good is building a $50B highway if only a few trucks are using it? This kind of infrastructure needs to be part of a much broader plan associated with primarily promoting agriculture.

10 Merge the World Bank, IMF and the UN Development Programme.


Better yet, get rid of them or ignore them completely. These organizations have done more harm than good in Africa.[/quote]

I like your thoughts regarding infrastructure....sometimes there are better ways to spend aid money than building big ticket stuff that looks all nice and shiney on the CNN International report. Money will be better spent going family to family....then expanding from that village to the next...and so on and so on. Sustainable agriculture should be the first goal, followed closely by or hand in hand with disease control....focusing on the quick killing ones first, then work on AIDS...or concurrently.

farfromglorified

tybird wrote:

disease control....focusing on the quick killing ones first, then work on AIDS...or concurrently.

Absolutely! It's important to note that while AIDS gets a lot of press, malaria is arguably the bigger scourge. Furthermore, there are many diseases affecting Africans that have cheaper and easier fixes than compared with HIV/AIDS. That's not to say that HIV/AIDS does not deserve attention -- it most certainly does.

There are numerous groups that accept small donations through which you can buy mosquito netting for families and hospitals in Africa. Mosquito netting alone can severly cut malarial infections. That kind of small investment can go a very long way.

Thecure

farfromglorified wrote:

Here are some other ideas:

Stop fixating on those infected with HIV/AIDS and start fixating on those without HIV/AIDS
The fact of the matter is that lots of people in Africa have AIDS and are going to die. You can either spend a whole lot of money trying in a largely failed attempt to save these people, or you can make significant investments in those who are not infected and are able to add net increases in value into society as opposed to net consumptions from society.

Don't forget about family planning
Family planning programs are a cheap way to help relieve the pressures of population growth. Stop moralizing and start using programs that work!

Treat AID as a business, not a charity
Stop being self satisfied because you gave an African kid some food. Chances are that African kid is going to turn into ten African kids who also need food and you've done more harm than good. Rather than operating from guilt, start operating from a position where you expect aid not to make you feel better but rather expect aid to make sustainable positive changes on the ground. Saving a kid from starvation today is relatively pointless. Contributing to the creation of a high-yield farm staffed by educated locals or to a school that is providing people with usable skills or to a trade shop that employs people, however, is amazingly powerful.

Ignore the "crises"
Africa is a land of crises. Every week there's a new war, a new drought, a new outbreak, a new famine. Too often our aid is tied to a knee-jerk reaction to these crises instead of the ever-existent underlying situations that create them.

There are many other great ideas out there and in my head...wish I had more time on this and I'll come back.

i have agreed with most of what you have said but this reply i have some problems with.

1) one issue with HIV in africa and around the world is that PHA's face alot of stigma. all PHA's are going to die thats true but it does not mean that they will die from AIDS. People are afraid of talking about HIV becuase it really talks abotu death. if peopel are afraid of talking about death they the conversation abotu HIV is not going to work. we must show non-PHA that you can still live a long life with hIV. teh way to do that is help teh people with HIV live longer.

2) Family planning is great but does not always work. in many areas in teh world and not just Africa women really don't have a say about sex. education about reproduction rights are very important.

3) i agree with yoru idea here but sometimes what we need is short term goals and long term goals. helping a child eat today does not mean that we still can't teach how to also farm for the future.

4) i agree with this statement, but what is needed is a conversation with teh people of Africa. teh sad thing is that the governemtn always get in the way.

farfromglorified

Thecure wrote:

1) one issue with HIV in africa and around the world is that PHA's face alot of stigma. all PHA's are going to die thats true but it does not mean that they will die from AIDS. People are afraid of talking about HIV becuase it really talks abotu death. if peopel are afraid of talking about death they the conversation abotu HIV is not going to work. we must show non-PHA that you can still live a long life with hIV. teh way to do that is help teh people with HIV live longer.

I don't disagree with this, really. My point was more about where money can be best spent. Certainly those infected with HIV can live long and productive lives. However, to do so, they need to be supported by expensive treatments. This makes them, in nearly all cases, net consumers instead of net producers. Aid dollars are going to be best spent supporting net producers instead of net consumers.

Secondly, while I'm certainly all for any kind of dialogue that would help remove the stigma of those struggling with infection, I'm not sure I want to go around advertising to the non-infected that HIV isn't a death sentence. HIV is a death sentence to most in Africa and will be for some time.

2) Family planning is great but does not always work. in many areas in teh world and not just Africa women really don't have a say about sex. education about reproduction rights are very important.

Absolutely! Good family planning is all about education regarding reproductive rights. Giving women access to depro, iuds, fertility beads and other hidden or culturally acceptable family planning tools in addition to general education can do a whole lot.

3) i agree with yoru idea here but sometimes what we need is short term goals and long term goals. helping a child eat today does not mean that we still can't teach how to also farm for the future.

Resources are not unlimited and never will be. Helping a child eat today takes away from self-dependence efforts elsewhere. It is what it is. Food aid should always be used in places where self-dependence efforts are underway and should never be used on their own.

4) i agree with this statement, but what is needed is a conversation with teh people of Africa. teh sad thing is that the governemtn always get in the way.

I whole-heartedly agree.

Thecure

farfromglorified wrote:

I don't disagree with this, really. My point was more about where money can be best spent. Certainly those infected with HIV can live long and productive lives. However, to do so, they need to be supported by expensive treatments. This makes them, in nearly all cases, net consumers instead of net producers. Aid dollars are going to be best spent supporting net producers instead of net consumers.

Secondly, while I'm certainly all for any kind of dialogue that would help remove the stigma of those struggling with infection, I'm not sure I want to go around advertising to the non-infected that HIV isn't a death sentence. HIV is a death sentence to most in Africa and will be for some time.



Absolutely! Good family planning is all about education regarding reproductive rights. Giving women access to depro, iuds, fertility beads and other hidden or culturally acceptable family planning tools in addition to general education can do a whole lot.



Resources are not unlimited and never will be. Helping a child eat today takes away from self-dependence efforts elsewhere. It is what it is. Food aid should always be used in places where self-dependence efforts are underway and should never be used on their own.



I whole-heartedly agree.

i agree with mostly all your points but i again there is one point that i have to disagree with with. but your view of net-consumers and net-producer is a point that i don't agree with. If all we are looking at is money in the present time then yes they are consumers but i can tell you that the long-term gain will be better than the short-term lost. if the PHA's are able to live longer than they could also work to decrease the rate of HIV infections. there is nothing more powerful than having a PHA teaching about HIV. i work in a AIDS Service Organization in Toronto and i will tell you there are times that i bring PHA's to schools and teh kids listen more to them then to me.

farfromglorified

Thecure wrote:

i agree with mostly all your points but i again there is one point that i have to disagree with with. but your view of net-consumers and net-producer is a point that i don't agree with. If all we are looking at is money in the present time then yes they are consumers but i can tell you that the long-term gain will be better than the short-term lost. if the PHA's are able to live longer than they could also work to decrease the rate of HIV infections. there is nothing more powerful than having a PHA teaching about HIV. i work in a AIDS Service Organization in Toronto and i will tell you there are times that i bring PHA's to schools and teh kids listen more to them then to me.

I certainly can get on board with the value of having a PHA teaching about HIV. However, I'm not sure I'm in agreement with this contention:

"if the PHA's are able to live longer than they could also work to decrease the rate of HIV infections"

Do you have data the shows that infected people living longer decreases the rate of HIV infections? I'd be really interested in seeing some hard data that could show that investing in HIV-infected patients could prove to be net-positive (meaning that they won't be taking more in aid than they'll be providing in economic value to their community). I'm certainly not saying it's impossible. Just haven't seen any data to support that contention.

As as side note, I just want to pass along my kudos for doing the work you're doing!

Thecure

farfromglorified wrote:

I certainly can get on board with the value of having a PHA teaching about HIV. However, I'm not sure I'm in agreement with this contention:

"if the PHA's are able to live longer than they could also work to decrease the rate of HIV infections"

Do you have data the shows that infected people living longer decreases the rate of HIV infections? I'd be really interested in seeing some hard data that could show that investing in HIV-infected patients could prove to be net-positive (meaning that they won't be taking more in aid than they'll be providing in economic value to their community). I'm certainly not saying it's impossible. Just haven't seen any data to support that contention.

As as side note, I just want to pass along my kudos for doing the work you're doing!

there is no stats that show what i am saying becuase most reports don't ask particiapants who are not HIV how they did not contract HIv. there are some studies that i can get to you about the effectiveness of having peer educators a related to HIV/AIDS. these studies give example of people who attended peer session with PHA's. i will have to find them so i can't post them right now. sorry about that.

tybird

farfromglorified wrote:

Absolutely! It's important to note that while AIDS gets a lot of press, malaria is arguably the bigger scourge. Furthermore, there are many diseases affecting Africans that have cheaper and easier fixes than compared with HIV/AIDS. That's not to say that HIV/AIDS does not deserve attention -- it most certainly does.

There are numerous groups that accept small donations through which you can buy mosquito netting for families and hospitals in Africa. Mosquito netting alone can severly cut malarial infections. That kind of small investment can go a very long way.

Malaria is bad enough that they are using DDT again in Africa....and they know how bad that shit is...:eek:

farfromglorified

tybird wrote:

Malaria is bad enough that they are using DDT again in Africa....and they know how bad that shit is...:eek:

The negative effects of DDT were largely overstated. While it's certainly not compeltely harmless, the effective ban on DDT has contributed to tens of millions of deaths over the last 40 years. Compare Africa to areas in SE Asia where DDT was used to basically eradicate malaria without even a single obvious link to a cancer or health crisis and it makes the DDT alarmists of the 70s look not only stupid, but absolutely evil.

sourdough

In terms of AIDS, I think the situation has become so dire that patents on ARV's need to start being ignored and declare an emergency. 10 years ago, Brazil faced what seemed like an imminent AIDS epidemic but fought incredibly hard against it. One controversial measure was to declare the AIDS problem as an "emergency" which allowed them to skirt the patent laws and began producing ARV's without paying royalties. It sucks for the drug companies but something has to be done.

I should note that the author of the book is a former IMF big wig. I neglected to offer that detail to discourage any prejudging of the ideas but I bet it makes a lot more sense now.

I do see his points though I may not agree with all of them. The problem with Africa has not been corporations or imperialists but largely has to do with their own crooked leaders and an overly compliant population. The "charity" model has failed of providing and sending aid. I'm not saying that we shouldn't help, but I think there needs to be a fundamental shift in looking at development by removing underlying causes which are largely because presidents and other officials are stealing any aid that comes into their country and leaving the population to starve.

Aid money is being funnelled into personal bank accounts, elections are being stolen and much of the rest of it is used to purchase military equipment. Only 25 years ago, Ghana had a higher GDP than South Korea. India and SE Asian "tigers" was a much more desperate place but somehow they managed so I do have hope for Africa.

Thanks for the well thought out thoughts. I think all of the points have been valid. True, malaria is a bigger threat, it is very different from AIDS when we look at the long term implications. The sad thing is that $5 for a mosquito net would save tens of thousands of children.

tybird

farfromglorified wrote:

The negative effects of DDT were largely overstated. While it's certainly not compeltely harmless, the effective ban on DDT has contributed to tens of millions of deaths over the last 40 years. Compare Africa to areas in SE Asia where DDT was used to basically eradicate malaria without even a single obvious link to a cancer or health crisis and it makes the DDT alarmists of the 70s look not only stupid, but absolutely evil.

Ain't talking about the effects on humans....it destroys avian species.