Comments

The bar graph above is revealing for PNG. No wonder those small island states with much fewer resources compared to PNG have much better development indicators. PNG 2012 National Election should be a turning point for all Papua New Guineans. VOTE FEMALE CANDIDATES.

Thanks for the interesting post and paper. You note that it is not clear why more female representation leads to better economic outcomes, and hypothesize that because women must go through greater obstacles to become representatives, they maybe more talented than their male peers and thus govern better. I am not sure this is the most likely explanation. For one thing, as female representation gets higher, the barriers to female participation should be lower. One would then expect diminishing returns to the excellence of female parliamentarians compared to their male counterparts. Two alternative explanations may be better candidates. First, as you note, women tend to be less corrupt than men. This is almost certainly a result of the social processes that shape the experiences and expectations around women, rather than some essentialist claim. In any case, less corrupt governance may lead to higher growth. A second possible explanation is that female leadership is more likely to focus on the provision of basic social services, such as sanitation, health care, and education, than their male counterparts (again, likely a result of their socially prescribed roles as carers). Perhaps governments that provides better social services and social protection lose much more GDP to ill health, and gain more GDP by having an educated workforce. This is all speculative, but the question of why you find this correlation is important. Hopefully readers can look forward to a follow up paper.

Thanks Mark and thank you Weh. Weh - I think yours is a very helpful distinction. Separating the ethical discomfort stemming from global inequality (which, as you point out, should effect all of us in the developed world) from questions of efficiency (what level of comfort is most likely to lead to effective aid) would appear to be a very important aspect of thinking through this dilemma carefully. Thinking that way certainly helps me untangle the ethical knot a bit further. Thank you for making the point.

Thanks Robert. I agree - as with almost everything in aid context is key. Even here in Honiara I wouldn't be that keen on negotiating a busy day on Mendana avenue on a bike. Although once you got your weaving wired you would end up travelling much faster than the grid-locked cars. Albeit at some risk to yourself.

This is an interesting talking point, but ultimately I think comparisons between aid workers and local people is a never-ending spiral. I can't really think of any situation that a foreign aid worker will be in where his life will approximate that of the average local person. This is not to say we shouldn't feel uncomfortable, aware, or ashamed of it - we absolutely should. But that's a global problem that everybody should be aware of, not just aid workers. What is perhaps more pertinent is focussing on thinking about the conditions that aid workers should be in to make them more effective (something that you've considered throughout this piece). By boxing aid workers into high class hotels, or compounds with high walls, or by putting a gap in pay between foreign aid workers and their local counterparts, how effective are these aid workers in being in touch enough with the local situation to make a difference. As you wrote Terence, "isolated in enclaves it can be hard for aid workers to stay in touch with the real needs of the people they work with".\ On the other hand, ignoring the needs of aid workers can make them more stressed, more burnt out and ultimately less effective in achieving what they are trying to achieve. Ultimately, it should be about finding a nice balance point between the two. Therefore, in answering the central question of this article, the main factor should be answering a question about effectiveness, not about whether it is "fair" or not. On a global scale, "fair" is not even remotely relevant.

This is a nice conversation. There should be no issue with aid workers being well-paid. It is often a donor intent that a large portion of the grant money boomerang back into bank accounts on their own soil. Workers can't affect that, so let it be. Living well should also not be an issue. It is a natural human aspiration to live as well as one can. Aid environments are inherently stressful, so there is no point in creating even more inner conflict through self-deprivation. There is also the issue of self-importance. Do you think your work is important and that you are a valuable asset to the community that you serve? If you do, then you should act every day to protect yourself as an asset and create a sustainable presence. For a lot of people, that means acquisition of safe travel, housing, food, and drinking water. Any thing less is irresponsible and negligent. If you do not think that your impact is equal to all of that, then maybe you are wasting your time at your site. Finally the issue of self-identity. Foreign aid workers can never fully identify with the local population. Local people know you are different, and no matter how much you make yourself suffer, they know you have different horizons than they do. You have a way out. Where ever you are, very soon you will be leaving, so there is little point in faking some kind of superficial solidarity. I think it is better to be genuine about who you are and what your needs are. You can make a stronger connection with people by being honest with yourself. If your objective is a deep cultural experience and the sickness and poverty that goes with that, think about joining the United States Peace Corps. But if you are being paid, everything about your presence should be top notch professional. So go ahead and take a dip in the Oxfam pool. It it's available, and if you like it, use it. Be safe, and be well.

All this leads, for me, to two key conclusions. First, we need to be sensitive to the issue Terence has raised and manage it for the best outcomes for all. Second, (and this partly contradicts the first) it is almost impossible to generalise as contexts are so very different. For example, riding a bike to work in Jakarta would be one of the most dangerous and impractical solutions imaginable to getting around!!

Thank you Garth, Claire and Robert for your comments. Garth - just to reiterate: I'm not an aid worker and I travel by bus. The bike idea is interesting, could I suggest you broach it with your colleagues. I can think of potential reasons why it might be problematic but it is your colleagues who you ultimately need to convince. And who might also be able to convince you that in some circumstances bikes might not be that advantageous. Also, you wrote: "On the broader issue, perhaps spending on foreign aid workers wouldn’t be so problematic if the share of total aid funding going to them was much less than the amount getting to local people and if there was stronger evidence that most consultants had a positive sustainable impact." When I used to work at NZAID overheads were less than 10% of total aid spend. This included staff costs and some of the consultant costs. Even if you added in the additional consultant costs, at least in the NZ aid programme, the cost of aid workers was still much less than the total amount of aid given to developing country partners. cheers Terence

I support Clare's view that you have written an interesting and balanced article. Being mindful of the disparities and the impact on both work and on accompanying families is very important. Achieving the best balance can challenging with the added complexity of spouses and children to be considered in some cases. Some of the worst cases I have experienced in Indonesia have (I hope!) now disappeared. One that was prevalent in the 80s was for advisers travelling to the field with national colleagues staying in upmarket hotels, including the Hyatt, while their partners stayed in cheapest small hotels. Today, for longer-term consultants living in the larger cities in Indonesia, the disparities are steadily reducing as the local middle class expands and living conditions become more comparable. Which raises the broader question, 'what are we doing there?' I write this from my comfortable hotel room in Ramallah .... Hmmm. Thank you again for an excellent article.

Thank you Terence Wood for your very balanced article. I have thought many times of writing something similar as I see ' that lucrative lifestyle' sometimes taken for granted (and absolutely expected) by some Australian Aid workers here in Fiji. I have worked in the area of Aid and Development for almost 10 years, the 1st five of which I worked with AVI (as a PACTAM paid health adviser). Not at all a lucrative salary compared to most but it still allowed me to live a comfortable safe existence in Fiji, where I still reside and have a 'middle class' lifestyle by Fiji standards. Thanks again for your interesting insights and hopefully it will create at least some 'reflection' among the thousands of Aid workers around the world, as it did for me. Clare

Terence, Maybe you and many other aid workers would benefit from a bike. They have these great electric assisted ones now that make hills easy, you can relate to the people around you and you can get about 40 of them for the cost of one Landcruiser. On the broader issue, perhaps spending on foreign aid workers wouldn't be so problematic if the share of total aid funding going to them was much less than the amount getting to local people and if there was stronger evidence that most consultants had a positive sustainable impact.

While the situation in Canadian aid looks pretty dire perhaps some of the negative effects can be reduced by working to focus ODA more on those types of aid and locations that have the most impact on reducing poverty and on getting the Canadian Government to make non-aid pro-development actions related to trade, access to essential drugs, intellectual property, sovereign bankruptcy, democratic international institutions and illicit financial flows.