Development & Aid, Headlines, Poverty & SDGs

Q&A: 'Monitor Aid Delivery Against Pledges'

Interview with Simon Maxwell, Director of the Overseas Development Institute

BERLIN, Jun 27 2008 (IPS) - The European Union commitment to stepping up development aid is expected to be put to the test at the G8 summit in Hokkaido in Japan next month.

Britain, Germany, Italy and France are the four European members of the G8, the group of eight most industrialised nations (the others are the U.S., Canada, Japan and Russia). The 27-nation European Union (EU) will also be represented at the G8 summit.

The G8 members of the EU have said they will carry a strong message of commitment to increased aid, but "there is a mountain to climb," Simon Maxwell, Director of the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) in London tells IPS European director Ramesh Jaura in an interview.

EU member states are committed to spending 0.51 percent of their Gross National Income (GNI) by 2010 on official development assistance (ODA). "The deadline is just round the corner, so this is a parcel that can't be passed to the next team of leaders," says Maxwell.

Excerpts from the interview:

IPS: Less than three weeks in the run-up to the G8 summit in Japan, the heads of 27 European Union governments met in Brussels on Jun. 19-20. Should we expect them to carry a message to Hokkaido Toyako that would give cause for hope to the developing lands in stark need of funds?

Simon Maxwell (SM): The strong message from Brussels to Hokkaido is that EU donors will meet the aid pledges they made in 2005. That was by no means a foregone conclusion, given past backsliding and the fiscal pressures faced by many governments in Europe.

Securing approval of the EU Agenda for Action on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) required some serious arm-twisting. Congratulations to the 'enforcers'. Let's hope, though, that these were not commitments made under duress that will be neglected once the enforcers have their backs turned. The later countries leave it, the harder will be the task of increasing budgets, and some countries have left it very late indeed. EU civil and political society have a serious job to do, monitoring delivery against very ambitious pledges.

IPS: What will the European countries carry in their coffers for some of the poorest countries that drew the focus of the Tokyo International Conference on African Development hosted by Japan last month? Can they be counted on for doubling of official development assistance to Africa?

SM: Africa will be a major beneficiary of increased funding, provided – an important proviso – countries in Africa can demonstrate absorptive capacity. Specific pledges have been made on health and education in the EU's Agenda for Action.

The agenda identifies, within time frames, specific milestones and actions in the context of pro-poor growth development in key areas, such as the reduction of poverty and hunger, education, health, environment, gender equality and the empowerment of women, water, agriculture, private sector and infrastructure, that will contribute to ensure the achievement of the MDGs by 2015.

It will be important to make sure the funding package is complete – infrastructure and higher education, for example, need to be on someone's list.

IPS: Does the Brussels summit hold out the solid hope that the EU countries will meet their aid pledges?

SM: The deadline is in 2010, just round the corner, so this is a parcel that can't be passed to the next team of leaders. The embarrassment if leaders fail will be extreme – and personal.

EU member states committed to meet 0.51 percent of GNP by 2010. With 2006 as the base year, Italian aid needs to increase by 179 percent by 2010 to meet the EU pledge, Spanish aid by 108 percent, German aid by 57 percent, and French and British aid by about 19 percent. Some smaller donors have even larger deficits in proportional terms. Collectively, the deficit amounts to nearly 26 billion dollars a year in 2006 money.

Q: The Brussels meeting is regarded as extremely important on the road to achieving the MDGs by 2015. Are we on track to achieve the eight MDGs?

SM: We are not on track. Of course, the easy thing would be to bury the targets. Political leaders have shown courage in making our collective failure a high-profile issue in 2008. In particular, the Call to Action summit in New York in September reflects the personal commitment of leaders like (British Prime Minister) Gordon Brown, who have made this a defining issue.

As to action, development ministers paved the way for heads of government at their meeting at the end of May, in the excitingly named General Affairs and External Relations Council, the forum in which development is now discussed in Brussels. The conclusions of the meeting illustrate some important tensions in the discussion about Europe's contribution to the MDGs.

A press release summarises the outcome of the meeting of development ministers, but they also adopted a long (37-page) set of 'Conclusions'. Start with the press release. It says, among other things, that "the Council considered that all of the MDGs can still be attained in all regions of the world, provided that concerted action is taken immediately and in a sustained way over the seven years that remain for fulfilling them. At the same time, however, it expressed concern at under-achievement in many countries and regions, in particular in sub-Saharan Africa."

IPS: Does the experience gained in the past eight years call for revisiting the MDGs as defined in the year 2000 and modifying these?

SM: Let's not walk away now from targets that will be difficult to meet. The urgent job is to start work on targets for the period after 2015. The MDG Call to Action summit in September should have that high on its agenda.

IPS: You are member of a group of academic researchers, led by Francois Bourguignon, formerly chief economist of the World Bank and now running the new Paris School of Economics. The group has been tasked to produce a report on the MDGs, which will be a precursor to next year's first European Development Report. What will be the main message of that report?

SM: The report is yet to be written, but an outline is available, and that hints at the conclusions:

Among the issues to be addressed are the following:

The need to include the concept of equity in the MDGs. Practically, is it desirable that MDGs include some ceiling on inequality – a more general concept than poverty – and some considerations on equality of opportunities?

Linked to the preceding question is the issue of the other dimensions of human development both in economic and non-economic terms. This would clearly incorporate some typically European normative views into the MDG framework. The question is however whether such dimensions are monitorable in any way. And, what balance should be struck between inputs and outcomes in the MDGs.

The outline ends with a summary of the likely conclusion of the paper. This is consistent with the thrust of the development ministers' conclusions, but emphasises the urgency and perhaps also the need for more attention to, especially, the problem of fragile states.

Q: What about aid effectiveness which will be the subject of discussion at the third OECD-DAC high-level forum in Accra? (OECD-DAC is the Development Action Committee of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, a grouping of 30 wealthy nations). Is the EU anywhere near "harmonising" and "aligning" its aid?

SM: There is a mountain to climb.