Comments

Interesting post, and on the whole I'm inclined to agree with you. I have yet to read A&R's book. However, I note that your counter-arguments (1) and (2) do not come equipped with supporting evidence. I think that both such arguments could easily be over-played. E.g. if challenged I suspect many an aid bureaucrat could claim that (1) and/or (2) applied to every single one of the programmes s/he funds. To conclude: it seems to me that you have defended some aid, whilst leaving probably the majority as unlikely to lead to significant economic development. A better defence is that a lot of aid will not generate economic development but, done properly, can at least make life substantially less miserable to millions of people who live below the poverty line. Alas I think too much aid is not 'done properly' but that is another story ...

Very nicely put Lotti. And I think you are basically correct WRT typical NGO staff. Although I think their situation is perhaps different from that of consultants and aid agency staff who tend to live in considerably more opulent surrounds and who do arguably live too well. Thanks for your comment.

I'm going to go against the flow here. In 6 years I've worked in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, Iraq, Solomon Islands and lived on and off in Fiji. One of my pet hates is the "Cult of the Self flagellating NGO" I work in rough locations and to be honest, I expect to be paid accordingly to compensate for austere/insecure living conditions, poor RnR and incredibly poor job security and work/life balance. Furthermore, I've seen my fair share of shallow ingratiation and now see it as the first step towards disillusionment simply because it serves as a band aid the patently obvious. By all means embrace the local culture, but don't think you're in with the locals because the unspoken truth is, you're just the latest in a revolving door of well meaning foreigners. Sustainable living conditions is key IMHO. I'm beginning to see strong indications that the deliverance of aid and capacity development within beneficiaries communities would be more effective if INGO's could retain specialist staff to provide consistency . Thats not the case as the staff turn over I see is directly attributable to poor renumeration and living conditions combined with a captured staff culture that embraces The Cult at a country management level. The current model is great if you want to turn over 80% of your international staff within 2 years, but that turn over comes at a cost to programme capacity and continuity. Something to think about.

I echo the concern... sadly we NGO's working on the ground find we are ever more bound by restrictive funding parameters, and country strategies which don't reflect the priorities we see on the ground. 2012 appears to be tighter than even in terms of what will be funded and what will not. And New Zealand Aid? humph. Where is it?? How on earth is it possible to access in any way that isn't according to New Zealand's internal benefit....

Thanks Garth. I think in some ways the Economist is almost worse than Lord A. At least his attack is fairly transparently ideological and opinionated, whereas the Economist seems to (perhaps unconsciously) be smuggling its own ideology into a putatively factual piece of reporting. The casual reader might quite likely spot Ashcroft's priors and discount appropriately but still be swayed by the apparent objective reporting of a supposedly reputable publication.

Yes Terence, The Economist certainly drew a strange conclusion from the Demombynes and Trommlerova paper saying: "The broad moral of the story is different: aid does not seem to have been the decisive factor in cutting child mortality". Yet the Demombynes paper identifies greater use of insecticide treated bednets as central to the drop in child mortality saying "Most of these programs have been funded by international development initiatives" (p16).

Thank you, Bob, for this very interesting and thought-provoking review. While I have not had the opportunity to read the book yet, it is very true that culture is too often ignored by donors and outsiders. To adopt wholesale progressive approaches in the most challenging of contexts (such as Papua New Guinea) would most probably fail. However, I would not undersell the importance of "incremental" change if and when supporting more culturally accepted teacher-dominated approaches. In the case of Papua, Indonesia, whose circumstances are similar culturally though not politically, basic issues like classroom management and low teacher capacity often preclude adopting more "progressive" methodologies at the outset. But over time, with regular and consistent support to teachers and school leadership and provision of appropriate learning resources, I've seen some more "active" teaching and learning approaches begin to take root and do quite well. More importantly, the students were more interested in school, coming to school, and continuing their education. Unfortunately, these changes were far from the norm and were more easily achieved within the pockets of highly dedicated, faith-based private schools. Influencing the larger education system is still another matter in these most challenging contexts. I don't believe we can have a discussion on the place of progressive education approaches without knowing more about the goals for student achievement and learning – as defined by the local and national context. Whether those goals are being met through formalistic teacher-dominated approaches is the real question. How well do formalistic approaches promote critical and analytical thinking, creativity, and life skills? And are these even the goals for the country in question? That should be the starting point for determining how to best provide support. Chimi Thonden

Thanks Lyn, I don't think I agree with everything you say but I think you're definitely right that: 1. Most aid workers' lives are not easy when compared to their suburban contemporaries back home. and 2. The cost of keeping aid workers well is actually tiny compared to overall aid flows and certainly cannot be claimed to have a significant negative impact on overall aid effectiveness. Terence

Michelle, Apparently the ban on media has been lifted, as reported in The National 25 September 2012. But media personnel still have to seek official clearance. Too little, too late. Construction is underway. As usual we are observers in our own country, unable to engage meaningfully in debate, marginalised, illiterate and ignorant. Only a small proportion of the population have the luxury of being able to keep abreast of issues via e-media but millions in PNG whose lives are affected directly do not. Your blogs are brilliantly written, thought invoking, and very interesting. I am especially interested in changes in Australian foreign policy where it concerns PNG and how it affects Australian tax payers, and PNG. Laikim.

I’d like to support your statement (on last third para) on small victories. Sometime when we feel that no way to win ‘big battle’, small victories will be a perfect strategy. Unfortunately it is very often that we have lost when we busy fighting the ‘small battle’. We don’t realize that the ‘small battles’ that we fight were not lead to the big one. Good understanding on political environment, broader political and institutional reform therefore will help us not to lost in the ‘small victories’ strategy.

Bob/Mark/Sopantini Note your comments with interest - having just returned to Jakarta from a Project Completion Report Review Mission in Uzbekistan for ADB. In this ICT Education project, consultants were fielded almost three years after Project became effective and computers delivered to 860 "cluster" schools in Year 3 and Year 4. Teacher ownership and use of the new technology, and focus on teacher-generated materials for classroom use, were unexpected outcomes - even though internet access to central teaching resources was part of the Project design. Centralized materials risk being e-textbooks while teacher-developed (and shared) materials have greater potential as learning-centered and student-focused. Perhaps Uzbeks are fortunate that they did not have PAKEM! Will read Guthrie with interest!

In my 25 year experience as both an aid worker's spouse and educator who has worked both in the classroom and in policy development and planning, I came to the conclusion that conditions for aid workers could be summed up as "deprived luxury". There was no place that I lived OS that compared to the wonderful freedom and comforts we have at home here in our average house in an average Australian suburb. The negotiations with contractors trying to screw the most value for the dollar from you, the uncertainty, often until the last minute, as to whether you would actually win the job and frequent delays in salary payments place great strain on relationships. I recall packing up our entire household - WE did the packing - only to get a phone call where my husband was told that the contract negotiated and signed off on was no longer valid because the contractor decided at the last minute that payment would only be two thirds the amount agreed. It would be interesting to survey aid workers on the topic of the breakdown of family relationships. If an aid worker takes on short term jobs, families lose their loved one and main support and provider for extended periods. When families do accompany the aid worker there are many distractions for the aid worker, many problems face the whole family, especially in terms of education for children and finding support systems that one can trust. In the end, as the children grow up, the husband is more likely to travel alone. Two households then become an added cost burden. It is at this point too, that marital relations often break down. The expat population is transient, one soon learns that this mean expat friendships are also transient, and finding acceptance with locals is a constant challenge. You talk about locals resenting the way expats live. Well, I recall on one long-term stint, we chose a very ordinary middle sized car as a practical way to get around a crowded city only to find it was frowned upon by my husband's local colleagues who bore no conscience in turning up in their chauffeur-driven latest model Mercedes. "Why doesn't your husband buy a decent car" one local official whispered in my ear. The biggest standard of living disparity in my view was between locals. Expat conditions were poor compared to the obscene luxury of the wealthy. Before people make broad-brush judgements about how much expats are paid and the "luxury" life they lead, they should look first at where most of the aid money goes. I think you will find it is into the pockets of government officials and their cronies who run the contracting businesses. These people can make the lives of expatriates a nightmare, no matter how dedicated an aid worker may be. Could it be for this reason that it is so difficult to find "stronger evidence that most consultants had a positive sustainable impact", as Garth Luke states? I think so. I always felt that if the wealth of the rich were fairly distributed via a decent tax system as it is in Australia, then it is unlikely foreign aid would be needed in third world countries. The question of salary and working conditions of expatriate aid workers is simply a convenient political distraction which takes away from the real, most apparent problem of aid - that the huge amounts money Australia spends on aid, simply does not get to to local people who need it most. That is the biggest challenge and governments choose to ignore it for face-saving reasons and to keep political peace with our neighbours.