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
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
Paving the Way: New Models of Development in Somalia
The debate over the efficacy of humanitarian aid in impoverished countries has been a hot topic in recent years. Some people believe that humanitarian aid breeds dependence, while others argue that it can exploit some of the most vulnerable people in impoverished countries. To provide better and longer-lasting aid, the U.N., the U.N.’s International Children’s Emergency Fund and the World Health Organization, among others, are taking a new approach to humanitarian aid. The new method, dubbed “A New Way of Working,” combines the short-term aid for emergency relief with long-term development efforts. The organizations are testing this model for development in Somalia, one of the more embattled nations on Earth.
Finding a Solution
Whether it’s disaster relief or funding for infrastructure projects, foreign aid does help people who need it. Despite the horror stories in the news concerning corruption, mishandled aid only accounts for an estimated 9 percent. Not perfect, but not as bad as some purport.
Many issues still plague not only the development in Somalia but in humanitarian aid and global investment around the world. One reason is modern humanitarian assistance finds its roots as a disaster response mechanism, whether it’s man-made or natural, and funds need to be spent within 18 months. Conversely, developmental aid sprung up as a result of colonialism and seeks long-term solutions such as education and agriculture, with funding plans structured in three to five years cycles. So, the projects needed to accomplish these varying goals are often very different.
Development in Somalia: A Guide for Others
Somalia is a country recovering from a two-decade civil war and a 2011 drought that killed over 260,000 people. With the government declaring 2017’s drought another national emergency, aid organizations realized a different approach was necessary.
In January 2018, the U.N.’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) and the U.N.’s Development Program (UNDP) set out to provide immediate assistance to those in desperate need of water. It also tried to identify the root of the emergency and establish projects that will allow everyday people to tackle the problem on their own when the next drought inevitably comes along.
While this sounds great in theory, there needs to be a practical element for improving development in Somalia. The current drought has lasted three growing seasons and is killing crops and livestock at alarming rates, which precipitates into a nationwide famine. In response, the OCHA-UNDP project built a sand dam in Bandarbeyla.
This dam allowed farmers to maintain their livestock, a vital resource for the agricultural economy in Somalia. Farmers say they can now save up the money they used to have to spend on water. Finally, these aid groups no longer have to focus solely on subsistence and can invest their energy and resources on education and security projects that will make Somalia stronger and more stable as it progresses as a nation.
Where Will It Be Seen Next?
The success of this project for development in Somalia is giving hope for other nations dealing with similar environmental and security-related emergencies.
The world’s youngest nation has over 1 million people at risk of famine. Luckily, the massive humanitarian response has kept the situation from getting worse.
Due to the Boko Haram insurgency, more than 5 million people need housing and food assistance.
A brutal civil war has left more than 75 percent of the population in need of humanitarian aid.
These three nations face similar problems to Somalia in that they endure a vicious cycle of drought and insecurity. The UNDP and other organizations are hoping to implement strategies similar to what is occurring in Somalia with the goal that “A New Way of Working” will allow these countries to flourish on their own.
– David Jaques
Photo: Flickr
How to Solve Poverty in 10 Steps
The fight against global poverty can be a discouraging one. The number of people suffering is hard to imagine for most middle-class families. While there is a multitude of poverty-stricken individuals, things are not entirely bleak. Poverty rates have been falling in recent years, and the word is getting out. People can make a difference in this fight with the right approach. There are answers on how to solve poverty, and time is showing us just how effective they are.
It is so important for developing countries that their agriculture is not only thriving but is sustainable. Teaching sustainable techniques to farmers is one of the ways that demonstrates how to solve poverty, because when a country’s natural resources are at their top potential, so is its economy. Teaching methods to sustain agriculture, investing in proper equipment and instructing farmers on more efficient practices will also improve the quality of life for the farmers themselves.
When asking how to solve poverty globally, a trend keeps popping up: many poverty-stricken countries lack gender equality. The fact is that when women are allowed to participate in the economy through new laws, social acceptance and proper child care for their family, the country thrives. Since roughly half of any country’s population is made up of women, it is not only arguably a moral obligation, but a practical solution for how to solve poverty. Gender equality can mean getting religious leaders involved, spreading awareness through the country’s media with women depicted as capable and even educating the women themselves on their rights.
Having access to clean water is a huge factor in a country’s welfare. Not only does it need to be safe to drink, but it needs to be closer to people’s homes. While most middle-class citizens can just turn on a tap for clean water to pour out of, many poor families spend hours just trying to find water, and it is not always entirely clean. Investing in clean wells and water systems can not only ensure the safety of a country’s citizens but can free up their time, allowing them to better participate in the economy
When a person is healthy, they can go to work, participate in community events (like voting or meetings) and can better contribute to society. Making sure a country has good healthcare is essential to alleviating poverty. This involves widespread vaccinations, investing in better hospitals and resources, training medical professionals and improving hygiene on a national level.
A huge factor in how to solve poverty involves education. Lifting a country out of poverty means educating its citizens not only on basics like math and science, but on proper hygiene, gender equality, educating females equally, economic factors and investing in resources for schools. To better the school system in developing nations, not only do the resources and school building need to be improved, but the teachers need to be trained properly and paid. Encouraging school attendance and teacher certification will create a more conscious society, more jobs and better-equipped citizens in the fight against poverty.
Not all countries can lift themselves out of poverty without help. Most will need aid from wealthier nations. Making that happen through legislation will ensure that funds go towards the struggle against poverty and will improve the global quality of life.
When it comes down to it, a nation struggling with poverty needs all hands on deck to resolve it. They need to have educators, businessmen and lawmakers all involved. This will help identify problems in a range of areas and will ensure that as much support as possible is being given.
People in struggling countries need to vote if they can for initiatives to help solve poverty (things like education funding and gender equality laws), and those abroad need to vote to make poverty a focal point of legislation. The government looks to the people for what is important, and if enough people vote on something such as international aid, then it will become a focus.
Throwing money at a problem will never solve anything. Funds need to go to a direct cause. Rather than giving a foreign government money for clean water, fund a well-building project. Rather than giving money to a country to hire more teachers, send teachers in to train some. Do not give money for a solution; give them the solution. This helps sidestep corruption and delay.
Ensure that the governments abroad are staying open to trade with developing countries. This will help fuel the struggling nation’s economy and create more jobs for that country. In the end, the wealthy country gains a new trading partner, and the developing country gains a sustainable way to grow its economy.
While the questions revolving around how to solve poverty are complex and face dead ends at times, there are solutions to the problem. Making sure that a solution is not only effective but sustainable is a priority that always needs to be met. The fight continues and will continue to be fought until all necessary steps are taken.
– Emily Degn
Photo: Flickr
How Chinese Foreign Aid Boosts African Development
China has been engaging with African countries since 1955, with the Bandung Conference. From the first efforts in Egypt to the TAZARA Railway, the most remarkable project China has in Africa, Chinese foreign aid boosts African development mainly in infrastructure, education, agriculture and energy generation.
Energy Generation
China spent $134.1 billion on energy generation and supply from 2000 to 2014. In August 2017, China-Africa Renewable Energy Cooperation and Innovation Alliance and Africa Renewable Energy Initiative (AREI) signed a Memorandum of Understanding to consolidate a cooperative relationship. This project includes building micro-grids for which Chinese providers and core renewable energy manufacturers will provide technological and financial support. This project shows prominent progress in renewable energy.
In addition, China has been increasingly engaging in the wind and solar PV industries under South Africa’s Renewable Energy Independent Power Producers’ Procurement Program, which focuses more on Chinese investors and companies’ investments, technology supply and manufacturing. Renewable energy generation is a win-win strategy, protecting the global environment and building the China-Africa connection.
Agriculture
Until 2014, China spent $10 billion on agriculture, forestry and fishing projects. In 2015, Chinese President Jinping Xi announced a $60 billion funding for 10 comprehensive plans to strengthen China-African cooperation. China-Africa agricultural industrial chains are one of the top priorities in these plans.
Additionally, China has been introducing agricultural technology and new breeds into Africa and has been sending agricultural experts to train African farmers. From 2000 to 2013, Chinese foreign aid to Africa in the agricultural sector has grown from $25 million to $325 million. The remarkable growth has brought African citizens an alternative way to improve their lives.
Infrastructure
Infrastructure investment has dominated Chinese foreign aid to Africa for more than a decade. The most significant project is the TAZARA railway in East Africa. The TAZARA railway was designed and built from 1968 to 1976. This 1,860 km railway stretches from Tanzania’s largest city, Dar es Salaam, to New Kapiri Mposhi in Zambia, which eliminates Zambia’s economic dependence on Rhodesia and South Africa.
This railway benefits the many rural regions along the route. There are thriving marketplaces at every train platform, providing a valuable method for rural residents and farmers to trade daily necessities. China invested more than $400 million in this project, along with technical assistance.
TAZARA railway is only one example of the many infrastructure projects China has worked on in Africa. From 2000 to 2014, China invested $88.8 million in transport and storage. The infrastructure aid has helped to stabilize African economic development.
Overall, Chinese foreign aid boosts African development mainly in infrastructure, agriculture and energy generation. Even though Chinese foreign aid to Africa is controversial, its investment has motivated African development on a large scale.
– Judy Lu
Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Driven by Industry: Water Pollution in Russia from Coast to Coast
A quarter of the world’s fresh water supply is in Russia, but a large portion of the resource has been tainted by industrial waste. Water pollution in Russia is problematic for Moscow, considering the city is 70 percent dependent on surface water.
With estimates of 35 to 60 percent of total drinking water reserves not meeting sanitary standards, water pollution in Russia effects all corners of the country. In fact, a report from Russia’s Ministry of Natural Resources in April of 2017 stated that 74 percent of Russians live in environmental deterioration, and that 40 percent of them consumed water unhealthy to drink.
Incidents of Environmental Abuse
Prosecutors recently charged that Russia’s Natural Resources Ministry neglected to collect environmental fines across Russia. Back in 2016, an industrial company named Norilsk Nickel was fined a mere $530 for contaminating an entire Siberian river with heavy metals.
In the northwest of Russia near Finland is a region known as Murmansk. In the past, this area suffered nuclear hazards and acted as the dumping ground of ship skeletons. The Kola Bay fishing community, a port town in Russia’s Murmansk region, is now under stress due to the polluted water.
In a progressive move, Russia’s federal budget allocated 50 million rubles ($880,000) towards cleaning the unauthorized ship dumps out of Kola Bay.
Karabsh
To the east of Moscow and just north of Kazakhstan lies the town of Karabsh in Russia’s Ural Mountains. There, a copper smelting plant dominates the environment and has been polluting the ground and water since the beginning of the last century.
When the town was young, it’s population reached 50,000, but Karabash now has a very high mortality rate from cancer and respiratory disease due to the plant; in consequence, the current population is 11,000.
“I’ve long since given up drinking the tap water,” said Vladimir Kartashov, a lifelong resident of Karabash.
The copper plant in Karabash has turned the town into an environmental disaster zone with water concentrations of arsenic 279 times, copper 600 times and lead is 300 times the permitted level.
Siberia
In Siberia, the large part of Russia east of the Urals, the deepest lake in the world lies just north of Mongolia. Lake Baikal hold’s one-fifth of the world’s unfrozen fresh water and is of exceptional value to evolutionary science; unfortuantely, the body of water can no longer absorb human pollution without consequence.
The lake’s ecosystem experienced an explosion of algal blooms, which deplete the water of dissolved oxygen and practically suffocate fish.
“I am 150 percent sure that the reason is the wastewater runoff from towns without proper sewage treatment,” said Oleg Timoshkin, biologist at the Russian Academy of Science’s Limnological Institute in Irkutsk.
Improve the Industry, Improve Water Pollution in Russia
In an effort of good faith, the Russian government is putting 26 billion rubles ($452 million) into a cleanup program, but water pollution in Russia is driven predominantly by industry.
Corporations do not have much incentive to practice eco-friendly habits due to the ineffective, unenforced fines. All across the country, rivers and lakes have been flooded with waste runoff from factories. Russia has the means to enforce its own environmental regulations, but Russia’s Natural Resource Ministry has neglected to collect on 132,075 instances of entire-river poisoning.
Hopefully the restoration efforts of Russia will become the nation’s norm, but for now, the world must wait and see what becomes of water pollution in Russia.
– Sam Bramlett
Photo: Flickr
How the US Benefits from Foreign Aid to Macedonia
One of the main goals of U.S. aid is to support Macedonia’s transition towards a market-oriented economy as well as its integration into the global trade economy, especially in the Euro-Atlantic. Trade between the U.S. and Macedonia in 2016 was around $276 million and is increasing every year. Electrical machinery and equipment have been the most popular U.S. exports to Macedonia, while imports from Macedonia to the U.S. focus on tobacco, apparel and metals such as iron and steel. The U.S. benefits not only from direct trade to Macedonia, but also through investment in its developing trade economy with other countries.
U.S. aid only helps to further bolster Macedonia’s improving trade economy through funding economic reforms and development, which not only improves direct trade to the U.S. but also increases the success of investments in the economy itself.
Trade is not the only improving economy in Macedonia. Recently, tourism has started to develop. Although in its infancy, contributing to 6.7 percent of the country’s GDP and employing only 1.6 percent of the country’s workers as of 2016, these numbers are expected to rise slowly but steadily. Tourism is also a very open market for foreign aid investment, with only about 2.4 percent of investment being in tourism. Considering that the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Macedonia going to other sectors, this could be yet another way to make aid more valuable to both countries by helping to better tourism in Macedonia, and in turn, providing profits for U.S. companies.
Lastly, keeping Macedonia as an ally gives the U.S. a valuable strategic partner for foreign policies and interests. Macedonia has often lent its airspace and provided troops to aid the U.S. as well as other countries in the U.N., such as for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. In general, the location of Macedonia is strategic to many of the conflicts the U.S. is involved in as well as for the stability of the region.
With a stabilizing government growing more democratic through reforms as well as a growing economy, there are many ways in which the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Macedonia financially, and with continued support, these benefits will increase for both countries. If the U.S. continues to be a dependable and helpful ally to Macedonia, it will return the favor as it has throughout its relationship by helping the U.S. and U.N. create stability in the region.
– Keegan Struble
Photo: Flickr
How the US Benefits From Foreign Aid to Somalia
The East African country of Somalia is one which faces many hardships. Violence, poverty and human rights violations are some of the highest-ranking issues, but the major focus of late has been the severe, ongoing drought that has impacted the nation since 2015.
The lack of water has inflicted suffering upon the entire region; however, conditions are improving since this time last year, largely due to U.S. humanitarian assistance in the region. In addition to supporting the nation, the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Somalia.
A National Disaster
In February of 2017, Somali President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed declared a national disaster due to the onset of an extreme drought in the country.
In a meeting with the National Drought Committee, Prime Minister Hassan Ali Khaire remarked, “my estimation is that half the country has felt the impact of this drought.” Millions of people were in desperate need of food, and Somalia was on the verge of famine.
Famine is a constant fear among the Somali people, as such an incident occurs often and has devastating consequences on the community. The last famine in Somalia occurred from 2010 to 2012 and was brought on by the East Africa Drought — a natural occurrence that resulted in nearly 260,000 deaths by starvation in the region.
This was considered the worst famine in a quarter century, but many more have taken place before, including one in 1992 which left approximately 300,000 dead.
U.S. Humanitarian Aid
To prevent the situation from becoming this severe again, the U.S. stepped up its humanitarian efforts in the country. USAID provided $187.77 million of foreign aid to Somalia in the 2017 fiscal year that included emergency assistance to approximately 2.7 million people per month from July to December.
These operations consisted of large donations of food, provision of food vouchers, access to safe drinking water, vocational training, medical assistance and employment opportunities in local marketplaces.
According to the most recent report on conditions in Somalia from USAID, this help significantly reduced the risk of famine. Between July of 2017 and February 2018, there has been a 17 percent decline in the acutely malnourished population — a major accomplishment considering the relatively short amount of time over which intervention has taken place.
U.S. Benefits from Foreign Aid to Somalia
There are many ways from which the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Somalia. According to a report by the World Food Program, food insecurity is a “threat and impact multiplier for violent conflict.” When people are starving and looking for any way out, they may engage in violent activities if a terrorist organization promises food or money in exchange.
Somalia is one of the most unstable countries in the world, especially with the terrorist group al-Shabaab on the rise. It is important for the U.S. to take any measure possible to prevent the spread of violent conflict, and reducing food insecurity is a small way to aid in that effort.
By contributing to solving Somalia’s famine crisis, the U.S. actively takes steps to ensure its own national security.
Another way the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Somalia is that by extending a helping hand to a country in need, the U.S. simultaneously establishes a friendship between itself and the Somali government. This collaboration may advance our foreign policy agenda in the future.
According to political science expert Clair Apodaca, foreign aid “allows the donor state access and influence in the domestic and foreign affairs of other states.”
Mutual Benefits in Times of Crisis
By offering humanitarian assistance in times of crisis, the U.S. gains leverage over the way Somalia governs its country. With this influence, the nation may be able to achieve its objectives to strengthen democratic institutions and improve stability in the region.
Lastly, the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Somalia because providing helpful programs and funding to people who are suffering improves our image as a leader in the global community.
Such actions demonstrate that the U.S. is an ethical and reliable partner, which can improve our favorability in the eyes of foreign leaders and ultimately help our diplomatic and trade relations.
Still Work To Do
Though U.S. foreign aid has helped Somalia avoid falling into a full-fledged famine, the country is by no means out of harm’s way. Rainfall is expected to be below average from April to June again this year, and around 5.4 million people are still experiencing either “stressed” or “crisis” level food insecurity.
It is important that the U.S. continue its humanitarian assistance programs in Somalia throughout 2018, and for as long as it takes to restore the country to a relatively stable state because by doing so, the nation is not only promoting the interests of Somalia, but of the U.S. as well.
– Maddi Roy
Photo: Flickr