Comments

Dear Joel I have worked for the past 28 years training doctors at the SMHS-UPNG and before that for 4 years training HEOs and Health Inspectors at the Madang College of Allied Health Sciences. My experience is that there are very few instances when overseas training is useful to us in PNG in the health sector. And in fact many times people go for overseas training and come back with ideas and agendas which are antithetical to the needs of the PNG health service and effective training of health workers in it. So not only a waste of money, but oftentimes we are handicapped by people with overseas training. There are of course exceptions to the above, but recently I have noticed with the experience of the Australian awards scholarships that they are often given to people who are too old (to be be able to come back and make a difference), or to people who really only want the degree to satisfy their own ego and increase their own status in the system when they return. This particularly applies to PhD awardees. And I also see that a number of Australian institutions really help the overseas candidates cross the line, - to the extent in some cases, of theses being almost ghost written, or at least 'supervised' to the point of hand holding. With regards the Cuban model: the model is good, but not good to send Pacific people to Cuba to do their programs. The latest experience where hundreds (and in the case of E Timor - a thousand) students were sent to Cuba for medical training has been a disaster. I hear that all the 'graduates' from the Solomon islands were unable to pass the basic registration exam on return to Honiara, and as you have noted Kiribati and other places are really struggling to now provide suitable intern (practical clinical) training for their graduates. Heaven knows what is going to happen to the E Timorese grads. When I was in E Timor 18 months ago, the first batch of 300 graduates were back - most had been posted to community health posts and had been given motor bikes to facilitate their work. However, many of them were just motoring around Dilli on the bikes. I was also interested to hear that you say that the Burnet Institute is helping to strengthen our Dept of Public Health at the SMHS: I have not seen any evidence of this. And we really do need assistance with strengthening our faculty at SMHS - and not just in the Dept of Public Health. In fact the whole of doctor training in PNG could fall over if 4-5 of us had heart attacks in the next few months - not unlikely as mostly we are over 60. How do we organize ourselves to get thru to dfat about the above.?? So much money being wasted at present. Glen Mola, Professor of Reproductive Health, Obstetrics and Gynecology, SMHS

That might have to be a topic for another day given that the present series is already so long as to try perseverance. You are correct that the 'other recipients' are unspecified countries only and do not include multilateral organisations and funds. The latter receive about one-third of outflows from DAC donors; developing countries receive the rest plus inflows from multilateral organisations and funds, and from other sources. It's certainly interesting that there has been such an increase in the amount of aid that is reported as bilateral but not attributed to specific countries. One driver of this might be the increase in the reporting of onshore asylum seeker costs. A chart showing the 30-year trend can be viewed <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/ittht1vduny9wi6/Unspecified%20bilateral.png?dl=0" rel="nofollow">here</a>. The proportion of of ODA in this category has increased from 15% in 1983 to 37% in 2013.

Perhaps a course in causal analysis is called for? At least for headline writers.

Great post Robin - it's so easy for these statements to become accepted wisdom through unquestioning repetition unless someone takes the time to unpack the actual data. I'd be interested to hear more in a future post about the flow to ‘other recipients’ - which has mirrored the increase to LDCs over the last decade, but certainly outpaced the growth in ODA to transition countries and longstanding MICs - and what the implications of this are. I infer from your comment in footnote 4 that this does not include funding to the Global Fund, Gavi Alliance and the like?

Social issues are a time bomb to PNG. As an individual, families, communities we need to play our part to stop this explosion. Our economy is booming in regards to the natural resources as this will bring much more issues that will directly affect our youths and bring this country into chaos. To fight social issues, every stake holders of this country has to work even harder to achieve a low level or nil social issues. Our Government has to take the upper hand to combat this mighty battle for the well being of this beautiful nation. I really appreciate the work of The Voice and other organization who are spear heading to fight this ugly battle. Thank you !!..

I've a different view on the matter that goes on with regard to the poverty of indigenous people. A study undertaken in Vietnam has shown that in general, the hill-tribes are poor but there are other groups such as Khmer and Hoa that reside in the southern parts of the country, poorer than the ethnic minority people. As revealed using a sample of over 400 households, Khmer and Hoa minority people (not ethnic minorities) are worse than hill-ethnic minorities in respect of most of the indicators tested such as literacy level, schooling, vulnerability, employment, house quality, household assets, income, etc. It is interesting to note that the ethnic minority people in the hilly areas have more income generating assets compared to the main stream Kinh and Khmer and Hoa are. The poverty of Khmer and Hoa are much worse than the mountain ethnic minority people. Visit this site to read the paper: http://www.communityresearch.org.nz/research/comparison-of-ethnic-mimnority-socio-economics-with-main-stream-in-vietnam/

Great post Joy! Obviously I salute any post that references Taylor Swift, Dolly Parton and Billy-Ray Cirus in a single discussion about development. And I agree with what I take as your key point: the SDGs have become something new and different from the MDGs. But just as Swift alienated some of her original fans with her Nashville to New York reinvention, a similar dynamic is potentially at play with the transition to the SDGs. Swift isn't a country singer any more. She's a pop star. Likewise, the SDGs, at least for advocates emphasising their normative function, don't seem to be fundamentally about setting priorities any more. They're about inclusiveness. Terence, yourself and numerous others in the comments (Garth Luke for example) have argued persuasively about why I should just shake it off and move on from my conviction that the SGDs, in addition to their normative function, must also do the hard work of prioritising. I just can't bring myself to do it yet. My Kenny Rogers references probably gave it away that in this case in particular, I'm slow to embrace new things... Thanks again Joy.

Good post Joy. While I see the need for complexity, as a communications person though, I still feel that there is a fundamental challenge in getting the message of the SDGs out there. Just like I know all the lyrics to 'Shake It Off' without ever having tried to learn them, I can also remember all the MDGs without ever having tried. The SDGs, on the other hand, seem more like the time I had a teacher who tried to make our whole class memorise the entirety of Banjo Patterson's 'The Man From Snowy River' and then simultaneously recite it. Very hard to remember, then messy, jumbled, and difficult to comprehend in delivery (only a parent could appreciate that performance...). So while the SDGs may present the complexity of development, they seem like a communications nightmare, which I think will raise some questions and challenges on how to successfully mobilise people around the goals. While cherry-picking particular goals to focus on in particular countries might work at the national level, I think its going to be a challenge to build up the international recognition that was there for the MDGs. Unless Taylor can write some kind of catchy tune about them. I think that is the only way I am going to be able to remember them all before at least 2020!

Thanks Terence. I take your point on data - it is a big challenge and one we will have to grapple with or we may face cherry-picking of the goals on a large scale. BTW, I couldn't help but make the Billy-Ray Cirus link, it was just too easy!

Hey there Joy, Obviously I dispute the assertion that I in any way endorse Billy-Ray Cirus. But, beyond that, great post. I agree entirely that the breadth of the Goals game from admirable intent: to be inclusive in process and in catching as much of what matters as is possible. My point (not really of contention, but more looking ahead) is how do we make the Goals work (i.e. how do we make them useful). Because they sprawl as they do (even though this is justified) we have real data issues, and we are also likely to have major issues getting campaign traction for the Goals. If/how we can do this successfully seems to me to be the million dollar question moving ahead. Thanks again for a good post.

Thanks Robin for an excellent piece of analysis. The frustration continues today with The Australian printing a heavily edited (without consultation) letter to the editor. For the record here is what Refugee Council of Australia CEO, Paul Power actually wrote in response to their misrepresentation of our analysis. "Dear Editor, It’s disappointing that The Australian misrepresents the Refugee Council of Australia’s analysis of global refugee statistics. Few people outside of Australia would accept the assertion that our nation’s response to refugees was the most generous per capita in 2014 (The Australian 8 August, 2015 Australia pulling its weight on refugees). To compare Australia’s Refugee and Humanitarian Program, we need to look at both components of the program - the issuing of permanent protection visas to refugees recognised through the asylum process and the resettlement of refugees from other countries. In the 2014 calendar year, UNHCR statistics show that Australia recognised 2,780 refugees through its asylum process and resettled 11,570 refugees from other countries, assisting 14,350 refugees in all. Around the world, 3,262,960 people were recognised as refugees through asylum processes and 105,197 were resettled, a total of 3,368,157. By this measure, Australia assisted 0.43% of the refugees recognised or resettled in 2014. It was ranked 22nd overall, 28th per capita and 46th relative to total GDP. Lebanon’s recognition of 364,129 refugees was 120 times greater on a per capita basis than Australia’s total response. Of the countries which typically grant permanent residency to recognised and resettled refugees, Sweden’s per capita response was 5.8 times greater than Australia’s, with 32,347 refugees recognised and 1,971 resettled. No amount of selective use of statistics will hide the fact that the Australian Government cut its refugee program by one third in 2013 while the world’s displacement crisis was growing to its highest level in 70 years. Paul Power Chief Executive Officer Refugee Council of Australia" With the media clearly lining up on one side of a debate, the rigor of our academic institutions is needed more than ever. Your efforts are greatly appreciated. Tim O'Connor Communications Director Refugee Council of Australia

Thanks Amanda for sending me the link for this article. Very informative and sheds light into Mobile Phones as a key development aid towards collecting development related data for policy making. PNG is yet to appreciate the use of mobile phones as an aid towards development in terms of using it as means of data collection and information dissemination. Since the introduction of mobile networks in PNG, by far, SMS remains the most popular and cheapest form of modern communication. From automated data collection for one-off survey purposes to frequent SMS based reporting and provision of automated Q&A systems for frequently asked questions, SMS technology can be utilized in a variety of ways. The only major setback to rolling out development related SMS Services seems to be the cost per SMS for large volumes. Although this may not be appropriate, <a href="http://www.matrixpng.net" rel="nofollow">Matrix Consultancy</a> is a local PNG SME that has invested considerable time and resources towards developing PNG MADE solutions using SMS. Mobile applications may become popular when cost of internet and internet enabled or application installable cost of mobile phones reduces but SMS will still remain the popular means of mobile phone based communication method for the foreseeable future in PNG. We have set up various SMS Services in partnership with PNG’s local MNOs. From complex and fully automated, live cloud based calculations involving various independent data sources and integration of popular sales/marketing and helpdesk systems down to simple google spreadsheet based SMS Services, we are now giving the opportunity for any PNG based client to be able to set up any SMS Service. You can find all updates of the latest SMS Services <a href="http://www.matrixpng.net/blogs" rel="nofollow">on our website</a>. We had an interesting discussion last week with you and it was our pleasure in noting that we had similar development ideas using SMS technology. It was however disappointing to note that there is less awareness at senior bureaucratic levels in the government circles and even NGO/SME/corporate levels in terms of utilizing local resources. It may seem there is a general lack of understanding in the various options available for costing and features and these need to be explained and understood for such a technology to be appreciated and advocated as a key development aid.