NationStates Jolt Archive

Economist Blames Aid for Africa Famine (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050731/ap_on_re_af/why_africa_goes_hungry)

DAKAR, Senegal - In Niger, a desert country twice the size of Texas, most of the 11 million people live on a dollar a day. Forty percent of children are underfed, and one out of four dies before turning 5. And that's when things are normal. Throw in a plague of locusts, and a familiar spectacle emerges: skeletal babies, distended bellies, people too famished to brush the flies from their faces.

To the aid workers charged with saving the dying, the immediate challenge is to raise relief money and get supplies to the stricken areas. They leave it to the economists and politicians to come up with a lasting remedy. One such economist is James Shikwati. He blames foreign aid.

"When aid money keeps coming, all our policy-makers do is strategize on how to get more," said the Kenya-based director of the Inter Region Economic Network, an African think tank.

"They forget about getting their own people working to solve these very basic problems. In Africa, we look to outsiders to solve our problems, making the victim not take responsibility to change."

Moving the aid can be nightmare in itself. Africa's good roads are few, and often pass through the front lines of civil wars. But Shikwati notes an additional problem: Even African countries that have food to spare can't easily share it because tariffs on agricultural products within sub-Saharan Africa average as high as 33 percent, compared with 12 percent on similar products imported from Europe.

"It doesn't make sense when they can't even allow their neighbors to feed them. They have to wait for others in Europe or Asia to help," he said. "We don't have any excuses in Africa. We can't blame nature. We have to tell our leadership to open up and get people producing food."


I rest my case.

I agree.
I'll have to write a full academic article about Aid, Growth and Trade in Africa later this semester. I'll update once it gets closer to the date...

Teach a man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime, give a man a fish, he'll keep frickin bugging you for more

It's probably gonna take some time, but i think that when the African Union realises this problem (which i think it has..) they'll do their best effort to change the situation for the best...

funnily enough, there's a similar situation in belgium
the flemish region is one of the most wealthy in the entire world, whereas the walloon (french-speaking) region is one of the poorest in europe.
every year, tons of money get transfered from flanders to wallonia, and it's only now that politicians in wallonia acknowledge the fact that the money made them 'lazy', so to speak.
their industry hasn't advanced considerably, and their entire economy is based on the fact that they get x million euro every year just for being belgian...
however, since they've admitted to the fact, they are prepared to take action, and have come up with some kind of marchall-plan for wallonia...
which basically means they are gonna pump loads of money into the economy, trying to give it a new zest.

how succesfull that is going to be, remains to be seen, but still, it's a good start.

imho, it can happen in africa too. it's one of the richest continents about (in resources), so once the political hassle has been dealt with.. (and i do believe that, like belgian minister for foreing affairs said, that africa is a great continent, but basically with bad leadership)
and by that he didn't mean that every single gov sucked... just that loads are just interested in what they can get out of it for themselves rather than trying to make things better...

I rest my case.
?What case?
You have informed us that James Shikwati has certain opinions, but unless your case is something along the lines of "James Shikwati's opinion is..." wouldnt it be best to exercise your case before you rested it?

Teach a man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime, give a man a fish, he'll keep frickin bugging you for more
The only way we'd ever "teach," Africa to fish is if we occupy their countries like Iraq, impose democracy, and force all of the local tribes and clans to stop warring with eachother, over prejudice.

But we won't. Because we benefit too much from exploiting Africa and even though there's an embargo on certain " blood diamonds," they're inevitably smuggled into America through Europe.

The only thing we can do with Africa is support any pro-democracy groups there, engage in "fair trade," give 'em plenty of foreign aid, or outright invade, establish democracy, and implement free trade. The latter would be more expensive in the short-term, but probably significantly cheaper in the long-term.

But we need to stop this inconsistent, half-liberal, half-conservative policy of giving almost no foreign aid and ignoring the problem.

I think the governments are aware of this incentive problem of aid.

This is why donor countries are now less likely just to "shovel out money" and instead make aid contingent on performance. E.g. the Millenium Challenge fund, or whatever it is called, that does not give assistance to corrupt regimes. The economist wrote that: "When aid money keeps coming, all our policy-makers do is strategize on how to get more," - at least this is a positive step to ensure that their strategies involve improving their institutional standards (transparency, democracy etc.)

The dependence mentality resulting from aid is undeniable. This is one of the many problems facing the developing world. However to suggest that “what is wrong with Africa is aid” is grossly wrong. The problem is these countries complete lack of human and physical capital, which cannot be created out of thin air.

The best option would be to make aid contingent not only on improving these institutions, but tying aid to investment projects (rather than consumption). Get the incentives right, get the development right.

?What case?
You have informed us that James Shikwati has certain opinions, but unless your case is something along the lines of "James Shikwati's opinion is..." wouldnt it be best to exercise your case before you rested it?

Just a few days ago I've had another thread here in which I argued that African aid and the entire framework of actions built around it (such as the Live8 and the constant advertising of African hunger) is doing by far more harm than good. This thread is basically a follow-up on the subject.

Just a few days ago I've had another thread here in which I argued that African aid and the entire framework of actions built around it (such as the Live8 and the constant advertising of African hunger) is doing by far more harm than good. This thread is basically a follow-up on the subject.
What about aid that is directly invested into social infrastructure? Is that bad too?

Just a few days ago I've had another thread here in which I argued that African aid and the entire framework of actions built around it (such as the Live8 and the constant advertising of African hunger) is doing by far more harm than good. This thread is basically a follow-up on the subject.
I kind of guessed there was probably some preceeding point to your post... ;)

With regards to the content, it's really just one opinion, how many African economists have a contrary or contradictory opinion of the situation?

I do not know that aid is good bad or neutral in this particular situation, but the limited information I do have suggests that no aid (for Africa) would not be preferable to the current aid situation.

-Snip-
I rest my case.

"But Shikwati notes an additional problem: Even African countries that have food to spare can't easily share it because tariffs on agricultural products within sub-Saharan Africa average as high as 33 percent, compared with 12 percent on similar products imported from Europe.

'It doesn't make sense when they can't even allow their neighbors to feed them. They have to wait for others in Europe or Asia to help," he said. "We don't have any excuses in Africa. We can't blame nature. We have to tell our leadership to open up and get people producing food.' "

Yes, aid creates a moral hazard for leaders of Africa. Your case, on that evidence alone at least, is far too thin.

Now, show me why Africa can't just lower those tarrifs, and invest more in infrastructure. Do they HAVE to keep this cycle going? And how many people would die if aid were cut before infrastucture was in place?

To me, it seems your cure is as bad as the problem itself. That moral hazard is defiantely a problem, and addressing it should be a high priority, but to simply let millions of people die just to light a fire under some professional beggars...

Even your proof of your arguments cites the governments of Africa as the problem, not the aid itself. HIS argument, which you've hijacked, calls for internal reform and restructuring of priorities, not the removal of aid.

Teach a man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime, give a man a fish, he'll keep frickin bugging you for more


Build a man a fire and he's warm for a night.

Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life :D

Yes, aid creates a moral hazard for leaders of Africa. Your case, on that evidence alone at least, is far too thin.

Now, show me why Africa can't just lower those tarrifs, and invest more in infrastructure. Do they HAVE to keep this cycle going?
You are making my case for me. They CAN lower the tariffs, the question is- why don't they? The answer, of course, is in the article:

[b]"When aid money keeps coming, all our policy-makers do is strategize on how to get more," said the Kenya-based director of the Inter Region Economic Network, an African think tank.[/quote]


And how many people would die if aid were cut before infrastucture was in place?
And how could the infrastructure ever be built while the aid, with all its consequences, keeps coming?


To me, it seems your cure is as bad as the problem itself. That moral hazard is defiantely a problem, and addressing it should be a high priority, but to simply let millions of people die just to light a fire under some professional beggars...
Not just to light a fire.

The entire concept of flooding a society with food and products that come for free is one big disaster. No matter how you allocate it, local farmers will not be able to compete with free food, and local tailors with free clothes, and local building contractors with free housing. Prices will be distorted and manufacturers made bankrupt. Which is why the only ones making money in Africa are miners and exporters of raw materials. Aid is what paralyzes Arfican economy. Aid is the reason why Africa needs more aid.

You are making my case for me. They CAN lower the tariffs, the question is- why don't they? The answer, of course, is in the article:

"When aid money keeps coming, all our policy-makers do is strategize on how to get more," said the Kenya-based director of the Inter Region Economic Network, an African think tank.


And how could the infrastructure ever be built while the aid, with all its consequences, keeps coming?


Not just to light a fire.

The entire concept of flooding a society with food and products that come for free is one big disaster. No matter how you allocate it, local farmers will not be able to compete with free food, and local tailors with free clothes, and local building contractors with free housing. Prices will be distorted and manufacturers made bankrupt. Which is why the only ones making money in Africa are miners and exporters of raw materials. Aid is what paralyzes Arfican economy. Aid is the reason why Africa needs more aid.

I totally agree about Aid paralysing African economies, as if you had a choice between free food and paying for food what would you choose?

Sometimes you've got to amputate the arm to save the body.

I know it's a distasteful analogy when said arm is human lives, but as long as aid keep coming into Africa its corrupt governments are never going to be forced to change their ways. Why would they when foreign governments are doing their jobs for them and shouldering the blame (who do you usually hear being accused of not doing enough, the country itself or, say America?)?

Africa needs to be left to its own devices for a while so it can be allowed to sort itself out and establish its own working infrastructure. It's a kindess, really, because in the long run all that's happening is Africa is going to continue to be slowly ground down by its wasting disease.

Aid is a tool to keep people alive; to create development in poor nations.

Good policy is obviously required and attempts to build industry. Western Industrialisation developed over hundreds of years. A long wait should be expected in Africa and leaving people to starve in the meantime simply isn't good enough.

African policy needs to change, true; but it is no reason to condemn hundreds of thousands to death. Aid should be used to keep people alive and then create a strong economy in the name of self sufficiency; as well as influence African economic policy.

i think its folly to think that if you just stop giving aid, the governments of africa will improve. seems to me that they will just try to get "blood from stones" and cause even more misery to their populations. when a government would rather let its people starve than let food aid come in without taxing it, they wont suddenly start treating their people well when that aid stops.

emergency aid is never wrong. letting massive numbers of people starve to death when we have so much is shameful. non-emergency aid, as others have said, needs to have a more helpful premise than "shovel money at corrupt governments in the vain hope that they will use it to help their people"

I find it ironic the same front that huffs the response "We give more in private donations and hard dollars than any nation" when confronted with the low %GDP the US gives in Aid, are probably the same ones that say that liberals are hurting Africa by demanding rich countries give more aid.

Sounds like they are trying to have it both ways. Fails to mention that it is the 'strings' that the US attaches to the money it gives is what helps ou the corrupt nations.

They have started a nice tread on this on Fark today

http://forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comments.pl?IDLink=1599057


In the meantime I suggest some of you play this game

http://www.food-force.com/

It gave me a bit more background on how aid is given by the UN.