Comments

As God created this world, he also created our parents subsequently to guide us in this rough world; likewise he purposely chosen the leaders to lead us into a right destination which God has predestined for us. But from my own perspective, everything is malfunctioning due to the leaders political conspiracy which is not good in God's sight. Such problems are just like rats coming out from within the nearest forest so leaders need to clear those unwanted weeds to prevent them from being conjured. Moreover, we as a educated person and unique individuals we have teach the next group of people who are following our footprints not to be like us but to be better than us. Do what you can do for Papua New Guinea and P.N.G. will change. Thank you Imma LEME YARAPAKI.

Marcus, I don’t think that de Tocqueville’s or Gramsci’s conceptions of civil society require industrialisation per se. PNG has numerous civil society groups (churches, NGOs, etc) and it’s not really industrialised. The rural and remote areas of PNG do have civil society groups that are active, although they are more fragmented than in other parts of the world. The interconnection between local and international civil society groups, and the PNG state, is more likely to occur in urban areas, but is not constrained to cities. In the rural areas of PNG, there needs to be a greater focus on how civil society groups are engaging with political society at the district level, given the moves to decentralise decision making and massively increase constituency funds. Gramsci would want us to understand how civil society might be complicit in both supporting poor governance and promoting accountability. And what civil society groups’ connections to politicians and bureaucrats means for their capacity to empower citizens (he wanted to see citizens empowered for the revolution, but I’d settle for stronger and more equitable democracy…). Also, you may be interested in a <a href="https://devpolicy.org/the-international-anti-corruption-conference-and-the-case-of-the-disappearing-prime-minister-20150831/" rel="nofollow">blog I’ve just published</a> on the affair of the IACC and the Malaysian PM. It further highlights the difficulties of claims about non-partisanship among international anti-corruption actors.

I can find no discussion in the text on why it is assumed that the population of Fiji is going to fall by close to 300,000 people between 2050 and 2100. please explain - I imagine it is a typo? (I shall look at your breakdowns on birth rates etc but think this figure is unlikely

Well said Margaret! One of the few who are qualified to pass judgement on the subject.

Could it be a co-incidence that this story was beaten up just before the Pacific Islands Forum, where Australia will face expressions of concern over recent cuts to ODA and meagre contribution to the Green Climate Fund?

Vini, Many thanks for that detailed response. It's hard to learn what is happening from the newspapers reports. Good to see you are working with NDC. Best wishes, Bryant

The other set of policies countries can pursue are those that ensure contraception is easily available to all women who wish to use it: and, generally, more women wish to use contraception than can get it. There is a blog in this. But for now, there are some useful cost-benefit analyses in <a href="http://www.familyplanning.org.nz/media/124184/research-investment-in-family-planning-kiribati-2014.pdf" rel="nofollow">Kiribati</a> [pdf], and <a href="http://www.familyplanning.org.nz/media/124187/research-cost-benefit-analyses-solomon-islands-vanuatu-2013.pdf" rel="nofollow">Solomon Islands and Vanuatu</a> [pdf]. These show what can be saved in health and education costs by investing in contraception, as well as the health benefits for women and their children.

Thanks Garth, And an important point: most Australian taxpayers seem to share your sentiment too -- https://devpolicy.org/in-brief/australians-support-aid-prefer-humanitarian-focus-anu-poll-20140904/ cheers Terence

Thanks Margaret, Our former colleague Jono has a great take down of the Australian's 'reportage' on <a href="http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/2015/08/26/Chronic-fraud-in-Australias-aid-program-Think-again.aspx" rel="nofollow">the Lowy Interpreter blog</a> too. And, beyond the world of aid, Michael Specter offers a <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/planned-parenthood-means-fewer-abortions" rel="nofollow">good defence</a> of Planned Parenthood at the New Yorker.

I agree with so much of what Richard says here. Except for the bit about "NGOs and the left of Australian politics do not want to talk about how aid delivers substantial national interest benefits and many on the right assume those benefits don’t exist. That leaves a tiny constituency for sensible policy making." The national interest benefits are less clear than he asserts given the tenuous links between aid expenditure and security, trade and people movements. However more importantly, giving national interest a high priority in our aid program makes it likely that the program will be shaped to meet our priorities rather than the pressing needs of the poorest people. Why can't we be altruistic with 1 to 2% our nation's budget?

Richard, so glad to read your balanced analysis and response to that flimsy bit of populist journalism.

Thanks Terence for checking the facts and countering this misleading and deceptive comment from Ms Devine. I suspect there's currently a campaign by conservative commentators to try to destroy the credibility of what little is left of Australia's aid program. Monday's Australian had a front page article on Fraud in AusAID which was similarly grossly misleading. I refer Devpolicy readers to Richard Moore's <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-australian-aid-fraud-beatup-20150825-gj76zh.html" rel="nofollow">comprehensive repost</a> in today's Fairfax press.