According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) report, in 2016, 30 countries in Development Assistance Committee (DAC) contributed a total of $142.6 billion as financial assistance to poorer countries, with the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, Japan and France giving the largest foreign aid.
On average, the United States’ government has given approximately one percent of its federal budget — about $34 billion — each year over the past decade to countries in need of foreign aid.
Out of the aid amounts from all donor countries, U.S. foreign aid ranked at the top of the list. Non-DAC countries, like China, are also responsible for a significant part of the total aid amount.
Each year, developing countries receive aid in tens of billions of dollars from governments in other countries. From obtaining diplomatic approval to business access, this aid can serve various purposes for the donor countries. From agriculture, to education and public health, recipient countries use aid towards a wide variety of issues and projects.
Here is a rundown of the five countries that offered the largest foreign aid and how that aid was spent by its intended nations. Due to the lack of detailed information for 2017 fiscal year, the list will be based on previous-year statistics.
1. China
A surprise to many, the winner on the “aid list” is China rather than the United States. As a non-DAC country, China has not officially disclosed its aid information; however, in a recent publication, researchers from AidData at William & Mary claimed that during the year between 2000 and 2014, China offered $350 billion-worth of aid to 140 countries and territories, sponsoring more than 4000 projects – the largest foreign aid program in the world.
In 2009, China’s total financial commitment to development aid reached a whopping $69.9 billion, two times that of the U.S. foreign aid in the same year.
A large chunk of China’s aid is categorized by AidData as “Other Official Flows,” indicating that though counted as foreign aid, these financial assistances are primarily intended for commercial access rather than for development and welfare.
Top recipients of Chinese aid are largely members of the One Belt One Road Initiative, a program by President Xi that aims to reinforce trading routes across continents.
As a result, almost half of the aid was spent on infrastructure sectors including energy generation and supply, transportation, storage and communication. The spending on agriculture, forestry and fishing only took up 3 percent of the aid.
2. The United States
From 2002, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has gradually boosted the total foreign aid budget to a steady amount that rests around $32 billion. With the Department of State and USAID as the nation’s main donors, the U.S. government distributed — not counting fiscal worth of military assistance — $34 billion official development aid (ODA) to over 100 foreign governments during the 2016 fiscal year.
Such an amount makes the U.S. the largest foreign aid donor among DAC countries.
Israel, Afghanistan and Egypt are the largest recipients of the U.S. foreign aid, receiving $3.10 billion, $1.51 billion and $1.46 billion of assistance, respectively. More than one-third of the U.S. budget is spent on long-term projects that promote economic growth and public health programs.
About 23 percent of such aid is used as humanitarian aid, and aims to fund short-term disaster relief programs.
3. Germany
With a volume of $24.67 billion in 2016, Germany’s foreign aid ranked the second largest in OECD’s report. Compared to 2015, Germany’s aid budget experienced an impressive 36.1 percent increase, making Germany’s ODA to gross national income (GNI) ratio hit the 0.7 percent mark.
An important factor in accounting for this major boost is the wide-ranging social benefits provided to the large influx of refugees.
Starting from 2016, the German government reclassified this in-house spending on refugee assistance as international development aid, aiming to hit United Nations’ 0.7 percent ODA/GNI target.
4. The United Kingdom
Before it was made a legal obligation by the U.N., the U.K. hit the 0.7 percent ODA/GNI mark in 2013 and has since maintained this ratio very well.
In fiscal year 2016, the U.K. spent a total of $18.01 billion in development aid, thus becoming the third largest foreign aid donor among DAC countries.
Pakistan, Ethiopia and Afghanistan each received more than $300 million in U.K. aid, and Nigeria, Syria, Sierra Leone, South Sudan and Tanzania all received more than $200 million. The aid is largely used for humanitarian programs and other crisis-relief projects in nations close to the European Union.
5. Japan
As the third-largest economy in the world, Japan contributes the fourth-largest ODA among DAC countries. Though Japan ranked high on the list of total aid volume, its $10.37 billion aid in fiscal year 2016 merely took up 0.2 percent of its GNI compared to the United States’ criticized 0.18 percent.
As a close tie to China in overall economy, Japan also engages in competition with China for potential markets in developing countries by giving out development aid. While China desires more of natural resources in recipient countries of its aid, Japan wants cheap land and labor so that it can compete with the world’s leading manufacturing industry in China.
Humanitarian Aid is on the Rise
As OECD’s report indicates, the world’s total development aid is on the rise. This trend is so prominent that DAC Chair Charlotte Petri Gornitzka expressed her delight in the ever-increasing trend and the generous contributions of the largest foreign aid donors.
With an increasing amount of ODA being spent on short-term humanitarian and refugee aid, Gornitzka urged countries to also focus on long-term development programs.
Regardless of the purposes of aids, this healthy trend of increasing aid showcases the collective efforts of the world in reaching the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals
– Chaorong Wang
Photo: Google
Credit Access in Liberia Improving Thanks to Efforts of Central Bank
In the country of Liberia, there has not been an effective credit rating system, and many businesses lack the records needed for credit approval. In response to this, the Central Bank of Liberia (CBL) has established a credit reference system that contains credit history and derogatory information about certain creditors. The CBL focuses on delivering financial services to the communities in the country without any services available to them. These services allow these sections of the country to become integrated into the formal economy.
These services include increasing access to medium-term financing, creating an environment for private-sector job creation and improving and empowering the Liberian-owned business segment of the economy. This will help improve credit access in Liberia and allow more citizens and businesses to have up-to-date financial records. It will also improve the legitimacy of those businesses and their credit records.
The CBL has also begun to issue treasury bills in an effort to develop a capital market. This has allowed the country to expand its foreign market, which helps improve the economy of the country as a whole. With the help of the CBL, the financial system in Liberia is steadily improving. This is happening despite the Ebola crisis and external shocks from the fall in international commodities. Liberia is slowly becoming more financially stable, which is helping both citizens and businesses.
Throughout the country, there has been significant progress in strengthening the banking sector. This has included the adoption of a national corporate governance framework and increasing the regulatory capital adequacy ratio and the minimum capital requirements. These changes to Liberia’s banking system have helped improve the effectiveness of financial institutions throughout the country.
The CBL has recently implemented regulations for all licensed insurance companies operating in Liberia. The regulation sets the capital requirement for each class of insurance business. It also requires each company to maintain a minimum amount of capital. This has been implemented in the hopes of strengthening the insurance sector. These regulations have had a positive effect on credit access in Liberia. They help improve the economy of the country and strengthen its finances.
Despite a significant portion of the population still residing in rural areas, the financial institutions throughout the country are helping businesses become more credible and allowing them to maintain their financial records through banks. As a whole, Liberia has greatly improved its banking sector, and is well on its way to being a significant part of the formal economy.
– Simone Williams
Photo: Flickr
Could Jackfruit Be Key to Ending World Hunger?
Unfortunately, with its notorious smell, jackfruit has fallen out of favor with consumers in the nations where it most commonly grows in the wild: India and Bangladesh. In India alone, more than 75 percent of the yearly yield goes to waste.
How Is Jackfruit Ending World Hunger?
Recent cautions from the World Bank and the United Nations illustrate how inconsistent rain and soaring temperatures have already reduced wheat and corn yields, and food wars within the next decade are a possibility.
There is an upside. The crops affected most by climate change also have substantial requirements for irrigation and pesticides. The jackfruit, on the other hand, is a perennial (meaning it regrows every year on its own). While it takes up to seven years to bear fruit, which means farmers have to wait, a single tree can yield between 150 and 200 gargantuan fruits per year. It serves plenty of uses, as it can be found in soups, jams and even ice cream. People eat them fresh, dried or roasted. The wood is even rot resistant. With the fruit’s versatility and the ease with which it is cultivated, it is no surprise experts are excited about the jackfruit’s ability to aid in ending world hunger.
Who Loves Jackfruit?
There is an organization aptly called Project Jackfruit that is looking to make jackfruit as readily available as possible over the world. The project believes jackfruit’s status as a “miracle crop” is just another reason it is essential to ending world hunger. It also states that the procurement of the crop will help fight climate change, eliminate waste, feed hungry populations and provide another revenue stream for impoverished farmers in South Asia. The organization markets the fruit globally and has set up relationships with Indian farmers to scale up their production.
The Indian government has gotten on the bandwagon by launching initiatives to increase the fruit’s use in a can and as a processed food. India is fighting to destroy jackfruit’s stigma as a “poor man’s food” via marketing strategies throughout the country. It is outsourcing these projects to local universities such as the University of Agricultural Sciences in Bangalore, India, which devoted two days to a conference that detailed plans to ramp up production and further market the jackfruit and its cousin, the breadfruit.
Looking Forward
Only a handful of commercial jackfruit farms are commercially viable at this point. Still, the future looks bright for the jackfruit. Governments are pushing the resilient crop in their own countries, as well as in food-insecure countries. At the University of Agricultural Sciences, a researcher referred to the fruit as a “miracle.” Combine all this effort with the rise of private investments such as Project Jackfruit, it will be no surprise if jackfruit is a primary part of the discussion behind ending world hunger.
– David Jaques
Mental Health in Latin America
Recent History
Over the last 10 years, Latin America has battled to better its mental health services, however, significant obstacles persist. Social stigmas prove to have the most negative consequences on those who suffer from mental illness. Stigmas around mental health in Latin America specifically revolve around the person’s personal life and their “lack” of productivity at work, both of which are heavily emphasized in society. Stereotypes and prejudices about mental illness often focus on the unpredictability of the illness, including capacities for violence and endangering those around them.
Originally, Latin American mental health policies shared the same overall attitude as the society did: lack of proper planning and institutions were not necessarily important. That attitude changed with the Declaration of Caracas in 1990 which implemented the following reforms in regional mental-health policies:
Organizations that Implement Policy
Since then, several organizations have emerged to help align the reforms with practices.
Pan American Health Organization (PAHO)
The Pan American Health Organization protects and improves people’s health by acting as the international health agency for the Americas. It believes in supporting everyone’s right to good health by providing access to healthcare when they need it. This is done by:
Its mental health program works within the Department of Noncommunicable Diseases and Mental Health (NMH) to promote and strengthen national abilities to develop the following areas in order to improve mental well being:
World Health Organization Assessment Instrument for Mental Health Systems (WHO-AIMS)
WHO-AIMS works in Latin America and the Caribbean to promote, maintain and restore mental health. Its plan is derived from 10 overall recommendations from the 2001 World Health Report:
This organization focuses mainly on financing the investigations to find which obstacles affect mental health services the most. Since its implementation in Latin America, there has been a 30 percent increase in the creation of mental health policies, as its focus evolved to a more positive trend of protecting human rights.
In Conclusion
Negative stigmas will continue to circulate around mental health in Latin America as the lack of knowledge and understanding surrounding mental illnesses persist. Organizations like the ones listed previously will continue to work against these stigmas and encourage understanding through education.
– Chylene Babb
Photo: Google
How to Register to Vote
Steps and General Instructions
The first step in how to register to vote is to check the deadline for registrations for the particular state for either mail registration or registration online. The deadline for voting by mail is typically judged by the date it was brought to the post office.
The next step in registering to vote is to check eligibility. In the United States, for instance, there is a list of guidelines that apply to those who wish to vote. The voter must be a U.S. citizen, be at least 18 years old by the election day (however, you are able to register early depending on the state law), have lived in a state for 30 days prior to voting, and meet the state criminal record requirements.
Registering to vote can be done online by searching your state’s registration website. The registration requires a valid driver’s license or ID card or the last four digits of one’s social security number. It can also be done in person, by finding the state’s location for registration which is typically at a department of motor vehicles, State assistance office, or a local library. If one wishes to register to vote by mail, use the application form to register and research the specific state instructions for the mailing address, and mail the application, or deliver it to the local election office.
How to register to vote if you are out of state? There is a Federal Postcard Application to vote absentee. By filling out the form, one can request an absentee ballot, fill out the necessary information and mail it back to the return address.
Register Today!
Registering to vote is a simple process as the country wants people to vote. By registering to vote, citizens can have a say in the country’s most important decisions. If you haven’t already, get registered!
– Chloe Turner
Photo: Flickr
Assisting Africa: Reducing Poverty One Acre at a Time
Andrew Youn is a 2006 Kellogg Business School graduate who is been helping farmers in rural east Africa to grow out of hunger and extreme poverty for more than a decade. His organization, One Acre Fund, supported 305,000 families in 2015 alone in doubling, tripling, and quadrupling their crop production. Andrew is committed to reducing poverty one acre at a time, and his work in Africa demonstrates this dedication.
The One Acre Fund
In 2006, One Acre Fund began its work in Africa in Kenya with an initial batch of 38 farmers, most of whom were women; today, the organization’s reach has expanded its operations to many countries including Rwanda, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda and Burundi.
The organization provides skill training, loans, crop insurance, material like fertilizer and hybrid seeds to small-scale farmers who typically have one acre of land or less. Undoubtedly, reducing poverty one acre at a time is a challenging mission but this group appears up to the challenge.
A Group’s Dedication to Poverty Eradication
Similar to Clint Borgen and The Borgen Project, Youn and his organization believe that with willingness and commitment, extreme poverty can be eliminated in our lifetime. In a recent TED talk, the One Acre Fund’s founder speaks about “three levers” that make this seemingly formidable task, achievable.
He states, “Let’s not feel sad about the state of the world, let’s engage our brains, let’s engage our collective passion for problem-solving and figure out what those levers are.”
Youn goes on to explain the model he’s using for reducing poverty one acre at a time. His organization utilizes field officers to deploy hybrid seeds and tools to small-scale farmers in rural areas. This course of action allows farmers to pay for their resources in flexible installments, which comes to then cover most of the operational costs.
The organization also utilizes field officers to impart hands-on training on how to apply modern farming practices such as micro-dosage fertilizer and seed spacing throughout the season. As a result, farmers have reported an increase in crop production by up to 500 percent in the past.
Combatting Poverty One Acre at a Time
One Acre employs an army of 2,000 field officers who served 400,000 families last year; currently, the company aims to triple in size over the next four years. In recognition of his efforts towards reducing poverty, Youn received the prestigious Skoll Award for Social Entrepreneurship in 2010.
In addition, Forbes magazine listed Andrew Youn in the prestigious Impact 30 in 2011 — a highly selective list of 30 of the world’s top entrepreneurs who use business to solve social issues. With his current trajectory, Youn and his organization will most surely continue to take poverty reduction one acre, and country, at a time.
– Himja Sethi
Photo: Google
15 Facts About the Rwanda Genocide: 100 Days & 800,000 Murdered
Rwanda is located in Africa and borders Burundi, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DR Congo), Tanzania and Uganda. Approximately 800,000 people were killed within the 100 days of the Rwanda genocide; the following facts about the Rwanda genocide explain the genocide’s precursors, methodology and consequences.
15 Facts on How 800,000 People Were Killed Within 100 Days
Future Prevention
These facts about the Rwanda genocide elaborate on the genocide’s background and future implications in order to educate the public and prevent other tragedies.
– Carolyn Gibson
Photo: Flickr
Humanitarian Aid to Kyrgyz Republic Promotes Development
The Central Asian Republic of Kyrgyzstan, also known as Kyrgyz Republic, is a landlocked and a largely mountainous country with a population of about six million. Humanitarian aid to Kyrgyz Republic has helped the country’s economy recover from the 2009 financial crisis and the 2010 inter-ethnic clashes.
U.S. and Kyrgyz Republic
In 2010, the United States announced a $32 million assistance plan for humanitarian relief, reconstruction and community stabilization efforts in the violence-plagued regions of both Kyrgyz Republic and Uzbekistan.
Kyrgyz Republic is one of the five republics of Central Asia and is very prone to natural disasters such as landslides, floods, earthquakes, droughts and melting glaciers. These natural disasters disrupt the normal flow of life and cause substantial damage to developmental projects.
European Commission
The European Commission (EC) has assisted people in the aftermath of these natural disasters via various projects. These efforts include improving food security in the wake of the harsh winter climate and providing small-scale support after floods, avalanches and earthquakes.
The EC also manages a disaster risk reduction program called DIPECHO which has funded more than 110 projects at the cost of €47 million (about $58 million dollars). DIPECHO’s tenth action plan for Central Asia (2017-2018) has encouraged EC’s partners to replicate previous successful community-based disaster risk reduction models to foster more local and national self-sufficiency and development.
Project HOPE
In 2017, aid organization Project HOPE donated $243,000 to medical facilities and non-government organizations. This humanitarian aid to Kyrgyz Republic was used to provide free health services and medical supplies to over 35,000 people. Project HOPE has been active in the Kyrgyz Republic since 2006.
The U.S. State Department noted in 2010 that the U.S. humanitarian aid to the Kyrgyz Republic has improved the country’s economic growth, promoted democratic reform by strengthening the civil society and helped the government combat international threats. Basic reforms in education, agriculture, energy and other ongoing priorities have also been instituted.
USAID
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has helped the Kyrgyz Republic maintain a parliamentary democratic system even as the country oscillated between two bouts of authoritarianism. Democratic reforms are especially important as Kyrgyz Republic is the only freely elected parliamentary democracy in post-Soviet Central Asia.
USAID works with the regional USAID Mission to Central Asia to propel the New Silk Road initiative which is aimed to strengthen the economic and cultural connections of South and Central Asian people which, in turn, helps propel the stability and prosperity of the region.
Diversification and Humanitarian Aid to Kyrgyz Republic
The World Bank has said that the Kyrgyz Republic needs to diversify its economic activities by increased private sector development and occupational training, especially to the young. Humanitarian aid to Kyrgyz Republic can thus help the government improve its governance at both local and national levels and promote the country’s economic and social development.
– Mohammed Khalid
Photo: Google
The UN Sustainable Development Agenda’s Relationship with Soft Power
Soft power, a phrase coined by Joseph Nye, is at the center of debates surrounding foreign aid and assistance. In Nye’s 1990 journal article titled “Soft Power,” Nye describes the strong shift in global powers.
The Shift to Soft Power
As the world grows more interdependent, there is a decline in the practicality of hard power — military might as a form of international governance and conquest. In our technologically advanced era, the strength of power no longer solely lies with resources, land and power of military, but rather in a nation’s soft power. Soft power can refer to a multitude of actions, and can be defined by multiple factors:
The extent to which a nation can control the global political environment, the cultural standing and domestic relations with other nations, and identify common goals and standards, all work to strengthen soft power.
Soft power must be developed over years, and in many instances, may be like walking a tight rope as nations compromise and work to maintain positive diplomatic relations along the way.
In a technologically advanced time where we move toward a global economy, hard power is becoming more expensive as it works to decrease the legitimacy of a nation’s leadership and can undermine its control over other nations in the global sphere. If other countries admire the values, culture and prosperity of a powerful nation, that nation can use soft power to co-opt rather than coerce compliance.
The U.N.’s Response: 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda
The United Nations (U.N.) was formed in 1945 when 50 countries met in San Francisco to create the United Nations’ Charter. Since their first meeting, nearly 200 countries are now member states of this esteemed organization.
In late 2015, the U.N. convened at the General Assembly for the 70th session; here the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda was introduced. The “Preamble to the Agenda” outlines the resolve to promote prosperity and peace across the planet, ending the “tyranny of poverty” with a desire to “heal” the planet.
Sustainable development is the idea of developing and progressing forward, without damaging the future potential for progress, prosperity and growth. With this agenda, the U.N. and its 193 member countries agreed to the three core elements of sustainable development:
All three of these goals are interconnected with one another and cannot succeed without the other. These core elements contribute to the development of soft power as it works to strengthen the U.N.’s standing in the global sphere and promote global peace.
The Relationship to Soft Power
Furthermore, the eradication of poverty is stated as necessary for the growth and prosperity of nations and is ranked number one out of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
Within the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, there are five areas of critical importance on the U.N. Sustainable Development Agenda:
The Fight for SDGs
The focus of the U.N. and its 193-member states to co-opt other nations into common goals is the epitome of soft power. This peaceful but necessary force will work in the U.N.’s favor to ensure the U.N. achieves its 2030 Agenda, pushing for a more prosperous and peaceful world where all of humanity is seen and treated as equals.
– Kelilani Johnson
Photo: Flickr
5 Countries That Provide the Largest Foreign Aid
On average, the United States’ government has given approximately one percent of its federal budget — about $34 billion — each year over the past decade to countries in need of foreign aid.
Out of the aid amounts from all donor countries, U.S. foreign aid ranked at the top of the list. Non-DAC countries, like China, are also responsible for a significant part of the total aid amount.
Each year, developing countries receive aid in tens of billions of dollars from governments in other countries. From obtaining diplomatic approval to business access, this aid can serve various purposes for the donor countries. From agriculture, to education and public health, recipient countries use aid towards a wide variety of issues and projects.
Here is a rundown of the five countries that offered the largest foreign aid and how that aid was spent by its intended nations. Due to the lack of detailed information for 2017 fiscal year, the list will be based on previous-year statistics.
1. China
A surprise to many, the winner on the “aid list” is China rather than the United States. As a non-DAC country, China has not officially disclosed its aid information; however, in a recent publication, researchers from AidData at William & Mary claimed that during the year between 2000 and 2014, China offered $350 billion-worth of aid to 140 countries and territories, sponsoring more than 4000 projects – the largest foreign aid program in the world.
In 2009, China’s total financial commitment to development aid reached a whopping $69.9 billion, two times that of the U.S. foreign aid in the same year.
A large chunk of China’s aid is categorized by AidData as “Other Official Flows,” indicating that though counted as foreign aid, these financial assistances are primarily intended for commercial access rather than for development and welfare.
Top recipients of Chinese aid are largely members of the One Belt One Road Initiative, a program by President Xi that aims to reinforce trading routes across continents.
As a result, almost half of the aid was spent on infrastructure sectors including energy generation and supply, transportation, storage and communication. The spending on agriculture, forestry and fishing only took up 3 percent of the aid.
2. The United States
From 2002, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has gradually boosted the total foreign aid budget to a steady amount that rests around $32 billion. With the Department of State and USAID as the nation’s main donors, the U.S. government distributed — not counting fiscal worth of military assistance — $34 billion official development aid (ODA) to over 100 foreign governments during the 2016 fiscal year.
Such an amount makes the U.S. the largest foreign aid donor among DAC countries.
Israel, Afghanistan and Egypt are the largest recipients of the U.S. foreign aid, receiving $3.10 billion, $1.51 billion and $1.46 billion of assistance, respectively. More than one-third of the U.S. budget is spent on long-term projects that promote economic growth and public health programs.
About 23 percent of such aid is used as humanitarian aid, and aims to fund short-term disaster relief programs.
3. Germany
With a volume of $24.67 billion in 2016, Germany’s foreign aid ranked the second largest in OECD’s report. Compared to 2015, Germany’s aid budget experienced an impressive 36.1 percent increase, making Germany’s ODA to gross national income (GNI) ratio hit the 0.7 percent mark.
An important factor in accounting for this major boost is the wide-ranging social benefits provided to the large influx of refugees.
Starting from 2016, the German government reclassified this in-house spending on refugee assistance as international development aid, aiming to hit United Nations’ 0.7 percent ODA/GNI target.
4. The United Kingdom
Before it was made a legal obligation by the U.N., the U.K. hit the 0.7 percent ODA/GNI mark in 2013 and has since maintained this ratio very well.
In fiscal year 2016, the U.K. spent a total of $18.01 billion in development aid, thus becoming the third largest foreign aid donor among DAC countries.
Pakistan, Ethiopia and Afghanistan each received more than $300 million in U.K. aid, and Nigeria, Syria, Sierra Leone, South Sudan and Tanzania all received more than $200 million. The aid is largely used for humanitarian programs and other crisis-relief projects in nations close to the European Union.
5. Japan
As the third-largest economy in the world, Japan contributes the fourth-largest ODA among DAC countries. Though Japan ranked high on the list of total aid volume, its $10.37 billion aid in fiscal year 2016 merely took up 0.2 percent of its GNI compared to the United States’ criticized 0.18 percent.
As a close tie to China in overall economy, Japan also engages in competition with China for potential markets in developing countries by giving out development aid. While China desires more of natural resources in recipient countries of its aid, Japan wants cheap land and labor so that it can compete with the world’s leading manufacturing industry in China.
Humanitarian Aid is on the Rise
As OECD’s report indicates, the world’s total development aid is on the rise. This trend is so prominent that DAC Chair Charlotte Petri Gornitzka expressed her delight in the ever-increasing trend and the generous contributions of the largest foreign aid donors.
With an increasing amount of ODA being spent on short-term humanitarian and refugee aid, Gornitzka urged countries to also focus on long-term development programs.
Regardless of the purposes of aids, this healthy trend of increasing aid showcases the collective efforts of the world in reaching the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals
– Chaorong Wang
Photo: Google
Ways the US Benefits From Foreign Aid to Bhutan
Bhutan is a small country sandwiched between India and China and the only country in the world that is carbon negative. The U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Bhutan in more ways than one can imagine. Although the U.S. and Bhutan never established formal diplomatic relations, the two countries maintain warm, informal relations via the U.S. embassy situated in New Delhi, India and Bhutan’s mission to the U.N., New York.
Both countries are members of many global financial institutions such as the United Nations, International Monetary Fund, World Bank and the Asian Development Bank.
Bhutan and the U.S.
The U.S. is one of the major indirect foreign sponsors of development of the fledgling economy of Bhutan. Yet, viewing it as an investment and not aid is more accurate as the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Bhutan.
The World Bank granted a $9 million interest-free loan to help Bhutan develop a calcium carbide plant near Phuntsholing. As of 1990, total Asian Development Bank loans to Bhutan amounted to $30 million.
Bank Loans
In 1987 and 1988 alone, the Asian Development Bank approved loans amounting to around $6.9 million to cover the costs of industrial estates modernization and to provide foreign currency for the Bhutan Development Finance Corporation, which in turn provided credit for agricultural projects and private-sector businesses.
Asian Development Bank loans to Bhutan for 1990-93 were projected at $35 million, plus a grant of more than $4.85 million; the aid was for technical assistance.
How the U.S. Benefits from Foreign Aid to Bhutan
Naturally, these plans have emboldened Bhutan; however, it is essential to note how the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Bhutan. The U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Bhutan by opening up numerous opportunities of an untapped market. Although, these may not be visible at first. The following points may bring about a new perspective:
As Governor Tom Ridge rightly states, “By building new markets overseas, for American products, the International Affairs budget creates jobs and boosts the economy here at home.” The opportunities in developing Bhutan could be endless!
– Himja Sethi
Photo: Flickr