Comments

Mbk anna ini setuju bgt, harus disebar luaskan. Terus menulis untuk hal-hal yang hidden gini mbk. Semangat

Totally agree with you, Juliet! I have worked with many expatriates who are good, great and listen.

Thank you, Stephen. Your insights on PNG are much appreciated. Hope to learn more about the context there.

Many thanks, Joy! We're in this together.

Awesome piece, Anna! I FULLY support your thinking. Local is good! Huge congratulations on your new roles as well.

What a great blog! Thank you both so much for sharing these insights and experiences.

Tremendous blog from Anna. On the mark. I have worked in PNG, a place replete with talent if you care to look. Anna’s observations that locals are best placed to negotiate the political economy, embed an intervention as a local solution to a local problem and strengthen partner government ownership of the outcomes is on the money. I shudder to think of the times I have sat in a meeting with local partners who quite correctly levelled the accusation that while the development agency loved to talk partnerships, it didn’t know what a true partnership was. Thank you, Anna for your pertinent advice.

Thanks for the great blog. I agree that we need to change our language, which can help in the process of changing our thinking and the stereotypes and bias behind our language. Perhaps we need to get to the point where the more common refrain heard is: "expatriate, but good, they listen" ...?

I affirm how vital localisation is for developmental work from countries such as Australia and the US. I also suggest local mobilisation as a priority not only for aid recipients but also for donor countries. Recently, we have seen benefits from localisation in foreign countries. In Timor-Leste, USAID and MFAT (N.Z.) committed to the <a href="//www.worldfishcenter.org/press-release/press-release-usaid-and-new-zealand-embassy-join-promote-aquaculture-development”" rel="nofollow ugc">National Aquaculture Development Strategy (2012-2030)</a>. NZ and the US worked with locals and analysed how tilapia fish consumption was high, but so was the price to import it. Tilapia farming increased economic welfare, nutrition and job opportunities. <a href="//www.dfat.gov.au/geo/timor-leste/development-assistance/economic-recovery-in-timor-leste”" rel="nofollow ugc">Australia</a> also assisted by building rural roads, infrastructure grants and education. Groundwork has reaped positive results when local needs are prioritised. Local efforts are effective. But how far does the term ‘local’ spread? I would argue that, as well as the aid-receiving communities, citizens in Western countries can become a part of the localisation efforts. Communities from the US, Australia, NZ and countries involved in developmental assistance programmes can contact local leaders to support foreign aid legislation. NGOs like <a href="//borgenproject.org/”" rel="nofollow ugc">The Borgen Project</a> reach Congress members to advocate for foreign-aid legislation and expand the Federal Budget. Rallying local members is efficacious, as legislation will be offered in the House of Senate (once Congress has heard the public suggest legislation multiple times). Perhaps more discussion for citizens to contact their local electorates and MPS can increase the conversation about localisation and aid projects, as it is a worldwide effort. Overall, local communities' needs are worth supporting. Continuing local mobilisation efforts through donor countries means there is cross-awareness from donor to recipient. Aid-consciousness of western civilians also increases social issues awareness and maintains the accountability of electoral members – keeping important work in place.

Are Timor-Leste workers included in these conditions..? There seems to be very little monitoring and audits on what they are being charged..ex 12 workers in a 4 bdroom house and charged $1800 in a w.a. rural town where the expected rent would be $400 ????

Thanks for this Andy. Just a few fact checks/comments (conflict of interest statement - I work for the PNG Treasurer). 2023 Budget deficit is 4.4% of GDP, not 5.4%. This is now less than half the 8.9% budget deficit in 2020 (using new NSO figures) indicating rapid budget repair. Expenditure increases by 10% but revenue increases by 20% in 2023, meaning a K1 billion reduction in the budget deficit. 2nd household assistance package totals K590m, not K560m. Over 2022 and 2023, expected funding totals K1,177m - first time for a PNG government to provide such support for households in the context of a global inflation shock. Most of this package has already been implemented – with the income tax cuts being applied by employers and the fuel tax reductions in place from 1 January. The school project fees component is implemented by parents simply not having to pay these fees (schools ask parents to generally contribute 20% of the value of school fees – the school fees are already paid by government and they will fund the project subsidy also in 2023). The slow implementation referred to by the Prime Minister covered public servant income tax cuts not being processed until November (which was pretty extraordinary) and then IRC advice that it was not possible to implement targeted GST reductions – so it has not been included in the second household assistance package. Treasurer has indicated that the foreign exchange shortage issue is a priority and is calling on the central bank to release higher levels of financing (PNG has K13 billion in FX reserves - the highest value ever). He initiated the review of the central banking act to address this fundamental issue and is also working with the IMF to move back to full Kina convertibility. But as noted, the issues are complex and politically challenging. The Marape Government is taking a much more balanced approach to economic development with a strong focus on the non-resource sector. At the same time, PNG remains one of the highest rated countries in the world in terms of mineral "prospectivity". PNG already has strong pipeline of minerals/petroleum projects, and it is highly likely that more prospects will be found over the coming decades. PNG needs to deal with the well documented "resource curse" issues facing many countries, but it should do so even in the context of continuing strong resource sector growth. The Government's 13 year fiscal repair plan (with a return to budget surplus by 2027) is based on strong expenditure constraint already, with expenditure planned to drop from 22.6% of GDP in 2019 to 21.7% of GDP in 2023 to 19.4% of GDP in 2027. The K13 billion FX buffer will assist with any adjustment on the external accounts. Prime Minister Marape is very capable of meeting PNG's national interests while also holding together his government coalition. Debt is incredibly unpopular in PNG – even more-so than in Australia. Going to the 2027 election with a budget surplus would be very popular. And he has a K13 billion FX war-chest to ease the time-frame for adjustment back to the pre-2014 situation of Kina convertibility. Appreciate all the work you do on the ANU-UPNG Partnership!

So many interesting thoughts. I'm a bit late to this article but I was an AYAD in Samoa way back in 2003-4 and I had a personally very positive experience but with limited development outcomes. I agree with the article and many comments that capacity building was a very 'ambitious' objective. To me, the vibe at the time in my AYAD cohort was primarily a bunch of young Aussies having a good time while hoping to add some international experience to the CV. In my cohort, there was certainly a desire to impart knowledge to the host organisation, but there was also a fair bit of realism in terms of how likely it was that some fairly green 20-somethings could really influence the outcomes of an organisation. I had the impression that it was as much about creating a positive image of Australia and exerting soft power in that respect as it was about achieving lasting development objectives. Overall, I think an Australian volunteer program is a very worthy objective, but the expectations need to be realistic. I think each 'volunteer' should aim to achieve a good outcome in the project or role they are in-country to undertake, kind of like an Australian-funded resource at little to no cost to the host organisation. In that sense, it is as much about giving the volunteer a fulfilling experience as it is doing a job for the organisation. But expecting them to achieve sustainable development outcomes in 12 months or so is not realistic and shouldn't be part of the program.