Comments

Yes, that may well be true Stephen! My argument is about trying to make the most of what we've got (trying to get TA to work better, given there's so much of it), but you are right that this approach does run the risk of continuing to legitimise its use in the longer term.

The issue of whether there is too much TA in the Australian aid program (surely, yes) is quite different from whether enough of that TA is spent on actually doing useful things (surely, no). The problem with suggesting that there are other "fancy" things TA can do (like "joining the dots" as you suggest) or of giving approaches to TA labels such as adaptive is that this simply legitimizes further reliance on TA with little or no return. It becomes a form of whitewashing.

Hi Jeol Negin, I wanted to ask what your point of view is about the guidelines provided by WTO and OECD for poverty reduction through aid for trade?

Thanks Stephen - my TA line was a bit of a throw away and not well explained. I agree that there are instances where substituting capacity may be necessary (and where the importance of getting a task done immediately outweigh that of longer term capacity building). But the Australian aid program remains quite TA heavy and I think there is also a danger that TA are too often the default answer. My wider point, however, is that even if you are in a program with lots of TA (which may constrain your ability to adapt to some degree) there are a variety of roles that TA can play that you can adapt the program to as is appropriate.

Many thanks for your comments John - yes indeed, adaptive programming fundamentally requires a 'thinking and working politically' approach, informed by good political economy analysis. I'm not sure that all programs that claim to be adaptive live up to that in practice (would welcome your thoughts on that in the PNG experience!) but certainly that's the intention...

Thank you for all the insightful comments. Many have asked what is behind my arrest and the bullying of Prof. John Warren the Vice Chancellor of UNRE? Regrettably, some public universities in PNG operate like joint criminal enterprises, serving only the interest of Council members and selected senior staff. Foreign Vice Chancellor need to respect the law of the land and will always aim for compliance. This is what creates the push back. When the foreign Vice Chancellor tries to take corrective action, the Council reverses the decision. I dismissed somebody in the payroll section for stealing after internal investigations found evidence twice. Council put her back. The Councils are aware of the illegalities, but choose not to act so as not to upset anyone. The former Vice Chancellor for example misappropriated K575,000 of PIP infrastructure funding, as evidenced by an internal investigation shared with the Dept. of DHERST. Similarly, the Registrar had evidence from parents that large bribes were paid to a selection officer, but refused to act. Although there was enough prima facie evidence, senior staff refused to cooperate with any police investigations. The same senior staff in 2013, in my absence, monetized a travel allowance to the amount of 15% of base salary, which in their case amounts to an extra K5,000 to K10,000 per year. In June 2017 it became clear that this allowance was illegal, but the senior staff refused to cooperate in phasing it out. All staff gets practically free housing, and in November 2017 it became clear that taxes had to be paid on the imputed rent. The Councils like a weak Vice Chancellor and become rubber stamp machines for the Chancellor. These chancellors exercise authority without accountability, and like to call frequent council or council committee meetings so that they can travel and receive per diems. If there is a Chancellor who correctly understands his role, he is perceived as "weak". It is truly not easy to fix University governance in PNG, but without a solution the learning experience for the students will remain abysmally bad.

Let me respond to Dr. Telue's false allegations. As you can see on my LinkedIn profile, I served in executive positions with board accountability for over 6 years total as Acting Center Director of School for Field Studies (based in Beverley MA, USA), as Academic Director (PVC academic) at Zudy University (Maastricht Netherlands) and as Development and Research Funding Officer accountable to the Research School board at Maastricht University (top #5 in THE ranking of young universities). The issue is moot in any case because the Sevua Investigation clearly established in 2013 that I had been lawfully and regularly appointed. The issue was brought up again in 2018 for purely political reasons. The government decided foreign Vice Chancellors were too much of a risk, exposing the joint criminal enterprise or mafia-like organizations that some PNG universities have become. In fact, Dr. Telue himself was an active participant when in November 2017 he came to the Administration Building with a fake court order and in company of armed police, trying to evict the Vice Chancellor. I helped him to find a graceful exit and establish himself, but he still enjoys attacking me with false allegations.

Hi Lisa, great piece and looking forward to reading the other two articles. I agree that aid programs are moving from conventional programming to adaptive programming, and also captures political economy analysis (PEA) or thinking and working politically. I work in this space in PNG for a while now and can attest this change. The theory of change that follows conventional programming approach centres on 'planning from the outside' for a client, and in nearly all cases does not involve the client(s). If it does, it reflects those who are not immediately affected. It involves very little PEA, and also very little of Thinking and Working Politically. I believe that is where the problem lies and the issues of sustainability, capacity building and all else with reforms. The planning for adaptive programming approach takes the best of both worlds- conventional and adaptive. The Theory of change for an adaptive approach considers the 'context', and within that 'context' are 'local solutions to address local problems' with involvement of local actors, driving the change. This is something pertinent to PNG, and I am sure others as well. The adaptive programming approach, with involvement of PEA and inclusion of thinking and working politically, I am sure will make a difference in how donors work, and especially in PNG. I hope your other articles capture aspects of the above.

Dear Michael Kabuni, this is an an excellent blog post. Political parties as a institution have only begun to form political positions on some issues affecting Papua New Guinea in a broad range of area's. However, the maturity continuum of PNG political parties and their party policies have only began to discover the importance of party policies platforms only insofar as it attracts membership to their party, relatively recently. I think part of this interest is buttressed or aided by the establishment of the Integrity of Political Parties and Candidate's Commission. I do agree with you to some degree that political party coalitions have largely been influenced by monosaturated politics over time since the first General Elections in 1962. It is only recently that there is a huge contradiction between Monosaturated Politics and Polysaturated Politics. The question is : do policies matter? I think the answer to that question is best informed by how the party leader's and political power-brokers answer this question on the floor of parliament during the formation of government. Of course the party with the biggest number of votes is invited by the Governor General to form government. Academically , yes political party policies are important. Politically, it's important to be in a party. In practice, it depends on political thinking at that very moment. I think the most important question for me is: why can't smaller parties merge with bigger parties?

Hi Lisa, Thanks for this piece, and we are looking forward to the next two as well. I did want to comment on your remarks on technical assistance, and the claim that the worst form of TA is one of capacity substitution. My experience is the opposite. The use of "advisors" to pursue the old holy grail of "building capacity" more often fails than succeeds. Much better that the expensive experts actually do something useful - especially in fragile states when they are typically "substituting" for non-existent capacity (and when they often have no-one interested in their advice). I've written about this quite a lot in the PNG context, and I'd invite anyone interested in the subject to read my blog: https://devpolicy.org/shifting-in-line-in-png-20150806/. Relatedly, I do think there is a danger that we put too much under the adaptive rubric. Whether it is better to hire people to provide or build capacity has nothing to do with whether a particular program is designed adaptively. Regards, Stephen

Most people dont realise how important party platforms and policies are. I personally see that most policies our current political parties dwell on seems old. For instance, 'Free education policy', that was PDM pary platform . However, many smaller parties do not have a clear cut on their partys platform and policies. It is better to draw party policies and platforms according to situations and changes we are facing now and what would come after.

Thanks Lisa for this nice piece. Aid programs need to follow conventional methods of flexibility, adaptability and working politically to appease both the donor and recipient countries so that both are on a winning curve. The Australian Aid program to the Pacific and elsewhere followed this method of aid program. The implementing parties and the recipient governments are guided in this principal to make good use of aid funding or other form of assistance. However, two important factors that you have not discussed here are sustainability and managing risks. Aid is external support with a fixed timeframe, the aftermath of the aid program is all about sustaining the program itself or integrating it into existing country’s program - sustainability. How the direct and associated risks which emerge as a result of aid programs is managed, is another key question. Without sustainability and a risk management plan, one would hardly anticipate adaptability of aid program in a country’s development or strategy. Currently in PNG and Pacific countries, Australian aid program emphasis more on sustainability and risk management of aid program than adaptability.