Comments

Thanks for this post. I'd be interested to know more about this assertion: "Importantly, key improvements were noted in all central government agencies headed by women or with women in executive positions. Clearly, critical gains can be made when women occupy leadership positions." What are the 'key improvements' and 'critical gains' that have been achieved in these agencies?

Hi Nicole I agree with the overall thrust of your article but dispute its factuality in several cases. In both Simbu and Western Provinces in PNG, women head provincial health services. I am proud of the fact that, when working in both these Provinces, my advice was sought and I was able to contribute to their selection/ appointments. The appointment of women to senior positions is of course only part of the battle. I know from my own experience that the appointments are often deeply resented and there are ongoing pressures to undermine their effectiveness because they are women. Sadly, this comes not only from the Papua New Guinea side, but also from 'development partners'. A lot more needs to be done on the appointment of women to senior position but also in acceptance and support of women to ensure they are able to be effective. Cheers, Phil

Great to read the Alders article in yesterday’s CT – it is indeed an fantastic story about an amazing women and the support that the aid program was able to provide to her work - resulting in huge impacts. I have had the pleasure of travelling with Robyn through Tanzania and Ethiopia and have seen firsthand the impacts this work has had on empowering women and the flow on effects of cultural change in the villages re gender roles and improved child nutrition. The AIFSRC was really pleased to be able to continue the support for Robyn’s work, especially in quantifying the impacts of Newcastle disease control on maternal and child health. So much flows from that - congratulations on the article. There are a number of stories of resilient Australian women in agricultural development, who have defied the odds and the system to facilitate real global impacts.

I believe the accolade is well deserved. In 2011, Robyn got the OA for her work. You might also be interested in some words I wrote in a little corner of <a href="http://www.ruralpoultrymalawi.org/nrpcgenesis.html" rel="nofollow">our web site</a>. One wonders what might have happened (or not happened) without Robyn: I'm not sure whether they really know it but Australian development agencies top the international arena in terms of their persevering support for Newcastle disease control in village chickens. They can stand proud of the fact. They were supporting it in South East Asia in the 1980s and later in Mozambique in the 1990s. That early work was enabled with technical expertise from Prof Peter Spradbrow at the University of Queensland and was financially supported by ACIAR. During the early 2000s, the work in Mozambique expanded to several other countries with financial support from AusAID and continues to the present day. And in the midst of it all! In 2003, very appropriately, the KYEEMA Foundation was born and helped push all this along.

Papua New Guinea we are classified under developing nation , yes it true in some sens . however in terms of business i dont think we are developing nation why ? as you can see now the growing of informal SMEs to big organization is much worst at this ages , our growing smes are employing expatriates and are moving on further to overseas and still the informal sector is growing. the suggestion here is that if the government wants more revenue , then it should look in to funding informal sector and marketplaces where the informal markets are taken places because these will be some other ways to earn revenues for it self. Another thing market places should be the priority for the government because the begining of business starts from there and out , more young people who are poor , homeless and starving even a week make alot of crimes and problems all around the country there for i suggest if the government can creates a bigger marketplace that may reduce some crimes and problems faced by our town and cities, because the young ones will participate in some form of activity that earns them living so they will forget about their past . and in that sense our country will live a problem and crime free nation which it should slowly develops our country.........(alphonse kori index student @uot lae 2016)

Very interesting. No doubt about the needs, particularly for capacity building, and the eight sectors are well chosen. As to the third, what capability do we still have (I know the South Australian government has been active). Perhaps we can give the Leyland buses a further lease of life!

Thanks Garth. That would be intriguing to test experimentally.

When World Vision surveyed Australians in 2009 we found that 30% of respondents wanted to be in the top 5 aid donors by volume and a total of 68% in the top 10. 63% agreed that "Australia should be a world leader in reducing global poverty". I took this to mean that a majority of Australians wanted Australia to be amongst the leaders in aid but not necessarily out in front. This suggests to me less interest in competition and more basing our response on our relative wealth in the world.

Thank you Pete, Good comment. One way of thinking about this is that the fact the UK test did have an impact is pretty good evidence that beliefs on efficacy are not the sole constraint on support. Numbers and levels clearly have an effect, though only -- apparently -- in combination with more social/normative factors. That said, we are also planning to test efficacy and the like. Stay tuned. Terence

hi terence, very interesting study - like Weh my mind goes immediately to what is the substance that ppl think of when we talk about aid? just the volume of $ or do they think of the impact that is achieved by aid?if the questions presented impact data, showed progress as well as highlighted further inroads to be made, perhaps the response to too much/too little/just right might produce interesting findings? thanks though for prompting such an interesting discussion

Thanks again Kylie, Two really good points. On the first, researchers in the UK have some provisional findings suggesting that normative communities are very important in shaping attitudes to development, which fits very nicely with what you're saying here. On the second, I like the idea of what we might call 'momentum bias'. i.e. whereas I'd thought the trends would show people what could be done by giving a point of reference to the past, as I take it what you're suggesting is that people see the trend and are affected by it (thinking, I guess, 'there's some good reason for it, so let's keep going'). That said there seems no obvious evidence of "momentum bias" in the UK (aid is trending upwards, but people are still unhappy about this on average) (although of course any effect might be being masked by other effects). Intriguingly, one point I didn't cover in the blog was that the the trend information did quite dramatically decrease the proportion of Coalition voters who think the government gives too much aid. This is a finding I'm still puzzling. Although my guess is that the trend data showed Coalition supporters that the govt. had reversed the Rudd increases and therefore they were somewhat more sated in their desire to cut. Thanks again for great comments. Terence

Hi Terence, Not a problem. I actually had few extra thoughts after I posted: - Changing norm perception isn't just about numbers, but identification and legitimacy as well. A Coalition-voting audience (the most supportive of aid cuts in your opinion poll) might be more convinced by a petition to increase aid signed by 50 Coalition voters, than one signed by 50,000 Labor voters (or 500,000 Greens voters). A petition supported by an influential social referent for the Coalition voters (e.g., a Liberal politician) may add to the effect. - Presenting descriptive information is often ineffective in changing attitudes, as it can appear to normalise the status quo, even more so if it suggests momentum. So I'm not too surprised your condition showing declining aid volume wasn't convincing for participants (it may have actually been counterproductive if participants inferred declining normative support for aid in Australia along with those figures). I'd be really interested to see any followup studies! Cheers, Kylie