|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Print this page
|
Note: This document is from the archive of the Africa Policy E-Journal, published
by the Africa Policy Information Center (APIC) from 1995 to 2001 and by Africa Action
from 2001 to 2003. APIC was merged into Africa Action in 2001. Please note that many outdated links in this archived
document may not work.
|
Africa: InterAction Policy Paper
Africa: InterAction Policy Paper
Date Distributed (ymd): 970316
Document reposted by APIC
This posting contains selected excerpts from the Interaction Policy
Paper on International Development Cooperation. The full paper is available
from Interaction (attn: Aliyah Nuri),1717 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Suite
801, Washington, DC 20036. Tel: 202-667-8227; Fax: 202-667-8236; E-mail:
anuri@interaction.org. It can
also be found on InterAction's web site at
http://www.interaction.org/advocacy/policyp.html
(56K).
American Values - National Interests:
The New Shape Of International Development Cooperation
An InterAction Policy Paper, March 1997
FOREWORD (excerpts)
"American Values/National Interests" examines the global challenges
and opportunities facing the U.S., and calls for a greater commitment to
development assistance. The paper's title reflects its central thesis --
that whereas the realities of the Cold War often forced us to choose between
our humanitarian values and our national interests, these two motives are
now complementary. Programs that help poor people and developing nations
also strengthen our economy and support our broader foreign policy goals.
Recent debates about reorganizing the U.S. foreign-affairs bureaucracy
have focused solely on organizational structure, rather than on the overall
mission, purpose and function of development assistance. This paper aims
to fill that gap by assessing the value of these programs and outlining
some principles that can make them more effective. We summarize without
preference the three organizational models that have been most frequently
suggested, weighing the pros and cons of each in reference to a set of
criteria that we feel should be met by any institution or structure.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (complete)
The end of the Cold War, an explosion of international trade, and a
series of global threats present the United States with unprecedented opportunities
and challenges. Whereas Soviet-era foreign aid often required us to choose
between humanitarian values and national security interests, these two
motives now complement each other. Development assistance programs that
help poor people and nations also strengthen our economy and support our
broader foreign policy goals. Despite this, recent years have seen growing
isolationism and shrinking budgets that have cut these programs by more
than a third. Meanwhile, the legislation and institutions behind these
programs have become buried under three decades of often-contradictory
statutes and regulations.
Calls to either reorganize the foreign affairs bureaucracy or maintain
the status quo have been made without first reviewing the mission, purpose,
and function of development assistance. This paper is therefore an effort
to assess the rationale for international development cooperation and establish
guidelines for development assistance programs and organizational structure.
Renewing U.S. commitment to international development cooperation has
five key parts:
- refocus development assistance programs on new development challenges;
- affirm U.S. global leadership by increasing development resources;
- structure our institutions so that they can respond effectively;
- renew the spirit of bipartisanship so critical to a successful foreign
policy; and
- restore the Presidential leadership needed to build public and political
support.
International development cooperation will be even more crucial in the
coming decades because of new global realities: the explosion of international
trade means that the U.S. economy is more dependent than ever on the developing
world; the end of the Cold War has caused a surge in democratization and
internal conflicts; and new global threats like rapid population growth,
environmental degradation, and infectious diseases present new challenges.
To meet these challenges, the U.S. must reform its development assistance
program in accordance with the following development principles:
- The primary goal of development assistance must be poverty reduction.
- People-centered development requires investments in broad-based economic
growth and human development.
- Gender equity is an integral part of development, and a key goal of
any program.
- Partnerships among donor nations, NGOs, local governments, and the
private sector are of great importance.
- Bilateral and multilateral aid are complementary programs, not an either/or
choice.
- Development assistance must be part of a broader policy agenda that
includes trade, investment, debt relief, and other issues.
U.S. development assistance programs should focus on four key areas:
1) promoting human development and equitable economic growth; 2) addressing
imminent global threats; 3) assisting countries in transition; and 4) supporting
emergency humanitarian and refugee programs.
Reshaping U.S. development programs in accordance with these principles
and priorities demands increased resources and a reordering of spending
priorities. Our overall international affairs budget has fallen by 50 percent
since the mid-1980s; total development assistance has declined by a third.
Such deep, disproportionate cuts have forced unacceptable tradeoffs and
weakened U.S. influence and leadership among donor nations. Moreover, because
development programs help prevent much more costly crises, restoring these
funds is not inconsistent with the goal of balancing the budget.
InterAction endorses at a minimum the Brookings Institution/Council
on Foreign Relations task force recommendations: a $500 million net annual
increase for sustainable development and anti-poverty programs; a $700
million increase to the international financial institutions, which includes
clearing our arrears; and paying in full our arrears to the United Nations.
However, even more resources are needed if we are to respond to the broad
scope of our foreign policy challenges.
In recent years, there have been calls to streamline and/or restructure
the foreign affairs bureau-cracy. Since most U.S. foreign assistance programs
are managed by AID and the State Department, debate about restructuring
development institutions has focused largely on these two organizations.
Three general options have emerged: 1) retaining an independent, reformed
AID; 2) replacing much of AID with an independent foundation and transferring
some functions to State; and 3) merging AID, in its entirety, into State.
Without endorsing any particular model, InterAction endorses a set of
criteria against which each of the models may be measured. Any organizational
structure for development assistance should:
- follow a clear definition of program purposes and objectives;
- make development assistance a key component of foreign policy;
- provide a framework that can effectively manage substantial resources;
- be cost-effective, streamlining procedures and eliminating duplication;
- protect development assistance from short-term political agendas; and
- provide a field presence to build partnerships and monitor results.
The general features of each of the three models are outlined -- omitting
management choices that are independent of overall structure -- and the
major advantages and disadvantages of each model are summarized in reference
to the above criteria.
Before policymakers decide which model to pursue, however, they need
to decide what they want in a development agency, and ensure that the benefits
of restructuring outweigh the costs. Finally, we should keep in mind that
what is truly important is not how we arrange organizational charts, but
whether we renew our national commitment to development assistance, which
is the key to preserving our leadership and protecting our prosperity in
an increasingly interdependent world.
[Outline follows]
INTRODUCTION ...
THE NEW GLOBAL REALITIES
The U.S. Economy and Global Interdependence ...
New Global Political Trends ...
New Global Threats ...
REFOCUSING DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE
What We've Learned: A Set of Guiding Principles ...
What We Should Do: Program Priorities and Objectives ...
SECURING ADEQUATE RESOURCES ...
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE ...
CONCLUSION (complete)
During her confirmation hearing, Madeleine Albright noted that international
affairs is only "one percent of the federal budget, but that one percent
may well determine 50 percent of the history that is written about our
era." Indeed, the direction of that history will in large measure
depend upon the leadership, values, and vision of the United States.
This leadership and vision must come from the President, and should
aim to renew the bipartisan spirit so crucial to successful foreign policy.
With Presidential leadership and bipartisan support, the American people
will rally behind a vision of global cooperation that helps other nations
and benefits our own. For its part, Congress must help create an enabling
environment, ensuring access to resources and removing the obstacles it
has imposed through extensive statutory constraints, earmarking, and micro-management.
The central message of the NGO community is that development assistance
must be a key element of our foreign policy. We have written this paper
to promote our vision and priorities for development assistance and to
focus attention on the need to revitalize a national commitment to bilateral
and multilateral cooperation. We believe this document will contribute
to important discussions about the framework through which such cooperation
is carried out.
What is truly important in the coming decades is not how the organizational
charts are arranged, but something more fundamental -- an understanding
that ours is an increasingly interdependent world, and a commitment to
the leadership and resources that such a world demands.
Appendix 1 OECD Development Goals
In May, 1996, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development's
21-nation Development Assistance Committee agreed on a set of basic goals
as a vision for the future. Among them:
- The proportion of people living in extreme poverty in developing countries
should be reduced by at least one-half by 2015. (The World Bank uses the
standard of $370 per capita in annual income, or about $1 per day, as the
threshold of extreme poverty.)
- There should be substantial progress in primary education, gender equality,
basic health care and family planning, as follows:
- There should be universal primary education in all countries by 2015.
- Progress toward gender equality and the empowerment of women should
be demonstrated by eliminating gender disparity in primary and secondary
education by 2005.
- The death rate for infants and children under five should be reduced
in each developing country by two-thirds the 1990 level by 2015. The rate
of maternal mortality should be reduced by three-fourths during this same
period.
- Access should be available through the primary health-care system to
reproductive health services for all individuals of appropriate ages, including
safe and reliable family planning methods, as soon as possible and no later
than the year 2015.
- There should be a current national strategy for sustainable development,
in the process of implementation, in every country by 2005, so as to ensure
that current trends in the loss of environmental resources -- forests,
fisheries, fresh water, climate, soils, biodiversity, stratospheric ozone,
the accumulation of hazardous substances and other major indicators --
are effectively reversed at both global and national levels by 2015.
The DAC also noted that: "Sustainable development needs to integrate
a number of additional key elements, not all of which lend themselves to
indicators along the lines suggested here. [...] While not themselves the
subject of suggested numerical indicators, we reaffirm our conviction that
these qualitative aspects of development are essential to the attainment
of the more measurable goals we have suggested....
"We now see a much broader range of aims for a more people-centered,
participatory and sustainable development process: reducing poverty while
achieving broadly-based economic growth; strengthening human and institutional
capacities within nations to meet internal challenges and help avert further
tragic cases of social disintegration and ‘failed states’; improving the
capacity of developing countries to contribute to the management and solution
of global problems; and reinforcing the transformation of institutions
and enabling environments to facilitate the emergence of developing countries
and transition economies as growing trade and investment partners in the
global economy."
This material is being reposted for wider distribution by the Africa
Policy Information Center (APIC), the educational affiliate of the Washington
Office on Africa. APIC's primary objective is to widen the policy debate
in the United States around African issues and the U.S. role in Africa,
by concentrating on providing accessible policy-relevant information and
analysis usable by a wide range of groups and individuals.
|
