Comments

An interesting read and timely as we are in the process of revising input, outputs outcomes in a logframe of a political and technical project following a Mid Term Review. Linda Kelly can related to this. Will share this article with partners

Thanks Andrea and Lisa for this piece and we have likewise greatly appreciated the three blogs and their contribution to the adaptive programming discourse. Steve’s comment and your earlier (first blog) recognition of the political economy amongst donor agencies and implementing partners highlights the complexity and challenge of practicing adaptive programming. Indeed, authority relationships and expectations between donors and implementing agencies frequently present barriers to adaptive management. Donors may be committed to working adaptively with partners but in practice, tolerance for program flexibility within donor agencies can be highly varied and dynamic. Furthermore, donor agencies that provide consistent trust and flexibility to partners may not resolve the tendency of partner agencies to avoid risk taking and tell donors what they want to hear. In other words, navigating the political economy between donors and partners requires redefining trust relationships within and between stakeholders and explicitly re-negotiating partnerships. Adaptive management and learning are iterative processes that requires flexibility and risk taking from both donors and implementing partners. To this end Lisa, your ‘finding spaces to work differently” point is likely a practical solution albeit requiring a confluence of the right moment and people. Thanks again.

What percentage of the Australian foreign aid budget is spent within Australia (such as purchases of food , clothing, materials, labour, use of the military ships and planes)? I am having trouble finding any info on this and I know it is happening.

Phil, there is an new research project by the PNGIMR investigating whether the cases we find in the Highlands are local transmission or imported cases. This is a follow up to extensive work conducted and published in the early 2000's. As you are aware, there is much more movement of people between malaria-endemic lowlands and the Highlands these days. Our last survey linked in this blog suggests that there is probably very little local transmission (<1% prevalence, all in adults). But we are also likely to find small pockets of local transmission in Highlands provinces at intermediate altitudes.

Less than three years ago the IMR was publishing on the reduction of malaria following the distrbution of free long lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs). Hetzel, M. W., H. Morris, N. Tarongka, C. Barnadas, J. Pulford, L. Makita, P. M. Siba and I. Mueller 2015. Prevalence of malaria across Papua New Guinea after initial roll-out of insecticide-treated mosquito nets. Tropical Medicine and International Health 20(12): 1745-1755. They conlcuded: "Malaria prevalence across PNG is again at levels comparable to the 1970s. The strong association of LLIN use with reduced parasitaemia supports efforts to achieve and maintain high country-wide coverage. P. vivax infections will require special targeted approaches across PNG." Has the distribution of nets stopped? Rotarians Against Malaria began the distribution of nets. Who funded them? Are they still being funded or was it a classic one-off aid project. In 2015 WHO warned that unless the funding was continued the halving of malaria infections in PNG would quickly be lost.

I'm not sure that the PNG highlands is actually malaria free any more. You see people with malaria in Mount Hagen and Goroka these days. The incidence of malaria seems to be creeping up to higher altitudes. Maybe the mozzies are adapting. I can't find any research on this aspect so maybe there's a lag there too.

I contrast, Timor-Leste claims to have almost eradicated malaria through its mosquito control programs and other interventions, malaria having been widespread just a few years ago. Maybe it is worth looking into what they did right?

Thanks for the nice piece. Australian Aid in PNG, the Pacific and elsewhere is actually delivered by the private sector, unlike the previous delivery model where aid is delivered through government machinery, systems and processes. The notion of outsourcing Australian aid delivery is a norm in today’s world, as is the case with Australian Aid. Almost the entire aid delivery is in the private sector hands. Only the non-financial aided aspects of aid delivery program is within the scope of DFAT. Areas like setting aid implementation guide, funding movement, priority areas of development programs, review program reports and have consultations and meetings with government. All the financial aided aspects of aid delivery is in the private sector hands. The procurement of equipment’s or materials, distribution, engaging stakeholders, construction work or even implementation reports are all done by private contractors. Therefore the big question is actually what Australian aid is worth. When the project is successful and has impact, the Australian government gets credits and applaus. When the aid is not delivering to expectation or not successful, it is the Australian government that is criticised, not the private contractors. This is the reality when taxpayers at home want to know the results and impact of aid.

Hi Sheena. Have you reflected on the develoment rights of indigeneous Palestinians, both in Israel and those refugees outside wishing to return to Israel? I would love to know your thoughts and what Australia can do to encourage greater support for indigenous rights in Israel, not just for indigenous populations within Israel, but also refugees outside, including those seeking to return to their lands in Israel. Seeing that Australia is a close friend of Israel, Australian indigenous voices may have more impact on Israeli authorities than (say) Arab voices, or even Asian voices.

Thank you, Roger, for sharing your feelings about my book. I'm afraid that if you actually read it you will be even more offended because it does have quite a lot to say about educational missionaries. However, the bulk of the book is an analysis based on 631 publications on education in 'developing' countries. Research evidence came from 32 countries that were not biased significantly by national per capita income, eligibility for foreign aid, HDI, or cultural cluster. All the classroom studies found that progressive reforms failed in the sense that they were inappropriate and/or had major implementation difficulties. No studies were uncovered that implied sustained paradigm shift occurred in classroom practice. Where some change occurred, it was almost invariably in 'surface' rather than 'deep' aspects (e.g. changes in arrangement of desks, or closed rather than open questions) that did not change fundamentally the role of the teacher as a transmitter of knowledge. One example, perhaps relevant to your Samoan experience, comes from Myanmar (Lall, M., 2011, 'Pushing the child centred approach in Myanmar: The role of cross national policy networks and the effects in the classroom'. Critical Studies in Education, 52, 219–33. doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2011.604072). Lall reported that rote learning there is the norm, but a network (comprising international and national aid and education organizations, commercial teacher training providers, and consultants) was pushing a child-centered approach in Buddhist monastic schools. Lall’s fieldwork involved classroom observations in 11 non-state-sector schools, interviews with 66 teachers and 19 teacher trainers, and focus groups with 58 parents or grandparents across four schools. While many said that child-centered was a 'better' approach to teaching and learning, the principal issue identified by teachers, head monks, and parents was that this western approach undermined traditional hierarchical structures of respect for teachers and elders, leading to a culture clash at home and in the classroom. As you point out, the modern world does require adaptation and change, but my view is that such change should be driven internally, supported if necessary, but not driven by, external change agents. Naturally, interpretations of and recommendations arising from progressive failures varied considerably in the literature. Although some of the evidence has been available for decades, the mainstream literature still holds the progressive paradigm as axiomatic, albeit with considerable cognitive dissonance apparent in the maintenance of progressivism both as an axiomatic starting point and as an unexamined professional end point, and often involving vested recommendations for more inputs. Too, much of the literature supporting progressive reforms is based on research and evaluations that are theoretically and methodologically weak. If you can present any sound, independent research evidence to support your views, I would be delighted to see it and to include it in any future writings on this subject.

Great thanks - esp undermining the SWP. A point: not sure about how well the backpacker arrangements are policed (suspect not at all) but the 457 visa arrangements and similar are not policed until a whistleblower goes public and forces an "investigation". Recruiters are similarly not policed.

Thanks John I am glad this resonated with your experience!