Archive for category: Foreign Aid

Foreign aid coverage and information.

3 Reasons Why Foreign Aid Matters to the UK’s Soft Power

The U.K. currently ranks third in the 2021 Global Soft Power Index, but analysts argue that recent cuts to its foreign aid budget threaten to undermine its position. So what are these cuts? Could they really weaken the U.K.’s soft power? Is soft power even that useful?

Since 2020, the U.K. has spent only 0.5% of its gross national income on foreign aid, as opposed to 0.7% – the U.K.’s usual level of historic foreign aid expenditure and the U.N.’s recommended amount.

Moreover, in the last week of March, the U.K.’s government suggested that they would cut their foreign development budget next year by £1.5 billion, making it the second year in a row that their foreign aid budget will be 20% lower than expected.

The U.K. set aside a third of its aid budget to deal with the soaring costs associated with housing refugees inside the country. A spokesperson for the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee said, “These rising costs are due to a “dramatic increase in expenditure on initial accommodations.”

The knock-on effect these added asylum costs has on a shrinking foreign aid budget not only matters to recipient countries but to the U.K. itself. The House of Commons International Development Committee said in a report, “U.K. aid extends the U.K.’s influence on the international stage, creating soft power.”

There are three reasons that better explain why foreign aid matters to the U.K.’s soft power.

Improved Reputation

In 2020, the Foreign Policy Centre spoke of the “communities around the world, who see the food, tents and other supplies that we distribute proudly marked with the Union Jack.”

This has a positive effect. The British Council’s Value of Trust report, polling more than 19,000 people around the world, found that the “perception of the U.K. as a contributor of overseas development aid was the biggest factor driving trust in the U.K. Government.”

On the other hand, the British think tank, Chatham House, claimed that stopping projects prematurely (including those providing reproductive health assistance to women), due to U.K. aid budget cuts, had a severely negative effect on Britain’s reputation.

In short, there is a need for sufficient foreign aid investment to ensure poverty-busting British programs see a successful conclusion, and to ensure that the U.K.’s standing on the world stage does not diminish.

Strengthened Diplomacy

Chatham House has also called foreign aid a “key tool in the ambassadorial toolbox.” Yen Ming-Hong, a former Director at the Taiwan International Cooperation and Development Fund echoed this. He said that in the 1960s when Taiwan was no longer represented in the U.N., the country tried to keep alliances with the African continent by providing “agricultural assistance in the hope that we can have their diplomatic support.”

In essence, this suggests that offering developing countries support through aid improves diplomatic relationships. Moreover, investing in aid through organizations like the U.N. could help the U.K. remain “at the table” in times of key decision-making within such an influential institution.

Deepened Academic Ties

Foreign aid from the U.K. is intrinsically linked to science and research. For example, according to the Director of the Institute of Development Studies, Melissa Leach, when it came to Ebola outbreaks in Uganda, British epidemiologists worked with Ugandan social scientists to come up with effective strategies and ideas to help contain Ebola amongst networks of friends and family.

As a U.K. policy paper recognizes, these sorts of joint academic exercises can “expand the U.K.’s network of Tech Envoys” and help “build our diplomatic network.” In other words, building scientific bridges could be a boost to the U.K.’s soft power.

So, while it is clear that a robust aid budget, set aside for foreign programs, plays a part in bolstering the U.K.’s soft power, it is also evident its soft power provides real social and economic benefits.

After World War II, South Korea, for example, received large amounts of U.K. foreign aid. Because of the diplomatic relationships and soft power that this aid effort leveraged, the U.K. built strong trade ties with South Korea. In 2018 alone, trade between the two countries was worth £14.6 billion, making it one of the U.K.’s most important partners in East Asia.

Looking Ahead

It could be to the U.K.’s benefit, then, that the country’s Treasury has announced that there should be a return to a 0.7% aid budget by 2026-2027. This may not only be a big boost to the U.K.’s soft power, but it could also strengthen the country’s economic position.

– Sam Rucker

Photo: Unsplash

,

The War On Hunger – The World is Winning It

The War On HungerFor centuries, famine has been at the forefront of poverty and global health issues in the poorer regions of the world. Around 660 million people may still face hunger in 2030, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), with the lasting effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on global food security contributing to this figure. Maintaining a diet that provides sufficient energy (caloric) and a diverse range of nutrients is crucial for optimal health. Undernourishment, particularly among children and mothers, poses a significant risk factor for mortality and other health-related consequences.

What Is Famine?

Famines are classified through the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC). The IPC helps determine when a crisis becomes a famine. There are three conditions to meet this classification:

  • “one in five households faces an extreme food shortage”
  • more than 30% of people struggle with acute malnourishment
  • “death rates exceed two deaths for every 10,000 people per day.”

There are also means to classify “great” (100,000 deaths)  and “catastrophic” famines (1 million deaths). Unfortunately, this target used to be constantly met throughout time, until the 1990s (when everything changed). Between 1870 and 1880, the death toll from famines stood at 15 million. This would rise and fall but would remain around the 10 million mark until the 1930s when the figure reached 20 million. During the mid-century, this figure remained persistently high.

From the 1940s right up to the 1980s, the figure flatlined at just below 15 million. By the 1980s, there was a shear drop, despite the shocking famine in Ethiopia that claimed more than 1 million lives alone. The 1990s had a similar toll. While these figures are far from positive, the entire world has been making progress in winning the war on hunger in recent times

The Causes of Famine

Professor Alex De Waal specializes in the study of famines. As the Executive Director of the World Peace Foundation (WPF), De Waal has an intimate relationship with its various causes and solutions. The WPF makes the case that the reason famines have receded is mainly due to democracy and political freedoms.

When famines have taken place, many argue that the forces behind such events were man-made and deliberate, rather than environmental and uncontrolled. The WPF claims that the connective tissue between famines in Yemen, Cambodia and Ethiopia, is the existence of dictators and conflict. Armed conflict and dictators disrupt food systems and uproot communities and livelihoods through arbitrary seizure and forced removal. When this happens, infrastructure left behind is of no use and communities become reliant on effective aid.

Foreign Aid and Famine

Famine continues to affect many communities, including Yemen, Somalia and South Sudan, and when it does strike, the swiftness of aid delivery becomes crucial. The World Food Programme (WFP) is one of the known organizations that make efforts to deliver aid during famines. The WFP is the world’s largest NGO catering to the needs of those in desperate need of food. It has had great success in preventing the maturity of food scarcity problems into famine in Afghanistan, helping 15 million people access nourishment and safety.

Oxfam is another organization involved in preventative and reactive measures. Distributing food, providing clean water and encouraging proper sanitation are all part of the organization’s efforts in the war against hunger. The Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) shares optimism about lower death rates and the humanitarian efforts involved in securing such results.

Famines have adverse long-term health effects. Studies have shown that survivors are “hungrier, sicker and less well” off for longer than the period of famine, according to Global Hunger Index. Malnutrition trends have not been as positive as famine trends, and global levels of acute malnutrition have been rising since 2008.

Signs of Hope

Efforts to combat famine and improve global food security have shown progress in recent years, with organizations like the World Food Programme and Oxfam playing a vital role in delivering aid to those in need. So far, the aforementioned “catastrophic” famines have been eliminated and “great” famines have near vanished. If projections are correct, then the world could be free of all famines by 2030. However, challenges remain in addressing malnutrition trends and ensuring long-term health and well-being for affected populations. Continued support and collaborative actions are crucial to sustaining positive advancements in the fight against hunger.

– James Durbin
Photo: Flickr

, ,

A Closer Look at Foreign Aid and Development

Foreign Aid and Development
A recent survey shows that 66% of Britons support foreign aid spending, but there is significant division regarding the specifics of aid, DEVEX notes. The British government is currently facing criticism as reports emerged that the government, in 2022, diverted £3.7 billion ($4.6 billion) from the foreign aid budget to domestic refugee programs. The act negatively impacted nearly all international humanitarian programs, according to Bond, a U.K. network of development organizations. Nonetheless, a British government representative highlights that Britain remains one of the largest foreign aid donors globally. A closer look at foreign aid and development illustrates the importance of aid to the world’s poorest.

Foreign Aid

Foreign aid remains elusive for many British citizens due to its complex network of donors and recipients. In essence, foreign aid involves the “transfer of capital, goods or services from one country or international organization to another for the benefit of the recipient country or population.” Its goal is to provide vital resources such as access to clean water, education, infrastructure and security.

Development

One should not mistake foreign aid as a mere wealth transfer or redistribution. Rather, it is an investment. A donor country in partnership with various private actors, provides financial resources or commodities: capital, credit, military and training, in return for preferential access to primary goods or capital returns on investments made in infrastructure or industry. Aid can be strategically deployed to ensure regional security, as investments in Libya, Somalia and Afghanistan exemplify.

As directed by the Marshall Plan of 1947, the U.S. sent complex aid packages made up of loans and goods to Europe to forestall the spread of communism and create a vast and dependable market for U.S. goods. This meant returns for both private and state investors and the recipient country.

Modern investments also have played a role in stabilizing regions. China, for example, has built 100 seaports in Africa to facilitate free trade and preferential access to goods. China built the Lekki Deep Sea Port in Nigeria. Costing the Chinese government $1 billion, it is one of the largest ports in West Africa.

The Chinese Ambassador to Nigeria Cui Jianchun says the project will create at least 200,000 jobs and will bring prosperity and security to the region. Of course, China, or the China Harbor Engineering Company Ltd (CHEC) specifically, owns 75% of the port and receives a fee on all goods entering and exiting. China has also provided humanitarian aid for disaster relief and refugee support globally.

Humanitarian Aid

Through foreign aid, countries and organizations are able to establish humanitarian assistance projects to help the most vulnerable people meet their basic needs. However, foreign aid primarily consists of comprehensive packages that include both development and humanitarian aid. Official Development Assistance (ODA) is a crucial aspect of this aid, designed to promote development and combat poverty. U.K.-funded ODA programs have achieved significant humanitarian milestones.

U.K.-funded ODA programs have, for example:

  • Immunized more than 56 million children between January 2015 and December 2017 saving 990,000 lives. An additional pledge will help immunize 75 million children over the next five years.
  • Made education accessible for 15.6 million people between 2015 and 2020.
  • Delivered nutrition programs for more than 50 million women and children.
  • Provided 365,000 vaccines in Syria and granted 1 million people access to clean drinking water.
  • Reached 300,000 women through the Work and Opportunities for Women programs.
  • Organized the “Better Work-Bangladesh” initiative, designed to improve the working conditions in the garments sector. More than 600,000 people labor in Better Work-registered factories in Bangladesh, with women accounting for 56% of this number.

Looking Ahead

During the U.K.-Africa Investment Summit in January 2020, the U.K. committed to investing an additional £1.6 billion in foreign aid and development projects to create jobs and foster growth. However, the U.K. falls short of the U.N. target of allocating 0.7% of GDP to ODA, currently spending 0.5%. The government suggests that financial constraints have affected meeting this target and it aims to return to it in the future. Global circumstances, such as the current focus on Ukraine, may redirect foreign aid budgets, raising concerns about neglecting other areas in equal need. 

The direction of Great Britain’s foreign aid and development strategy appears uncertain amidst the influence of COVID-19 and Brexit. These events have compelled the U.K. government to reevaluate its global stance, leading to budget reductions and altered spending priorities. However, as economic conditions improve, there is optimism that the U.K. will establish well-defined and impactful foreign aid strategies and objectives.

– James Durbin
Photo: Flickr

How The Taal Volcano Eruption Affected Poverty In The Philippines 

Taal Volcano EruptionThe Taal Volcano eruption in January 2020 significantly impacted poverty in the Philippines, most notably in the Batangas province where the active volcano is. The eruption caused widespread damage to homes, livelihoods and infrastructure, with vulnerable communities taking the most hit.

Per the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA), poverty in the Batangas region affects 10.2% of the population, which translates to 1.68 million Filipinos who cannot meet “basic food and non-food” needs. Poverty incidence among families stood at 7.2% of the population or 296 thousand families.

Agriculture and Tourism

In 2020, the Department of Agriculture revealed the damages to the agricultural sector reached approximately $54 million, affecting 15,790 hectares of farmland. The loss of money was attributed to the destruction of crops, farm infrastructure and displacement of livestock. Unfortunately, setbacks in the agricultural sector put vulnerable rural communities and workers in the Batanga province at risk.

The Taal Volcano is a popular tourist destination and the eruption in 2020 led to the closure of the area to tourists, resulting in a decline in tourism and tourism-related businesses. Tourism sites within a 14-kilometer zone suffered an estimated damage of $1.5 million and an estimated loss of $2.1 million. The Taal volcano eruption affected poverty and tourism in the area for many years to come.

Vulnerable Communities

Exposure to volcano smog (sulfur dioxide gas emissions) can cause symptoms such as irritated/swollen eyes and irritations to the throat. Those with pre-existing health conditions, the elderly, pregnant women and children were most susceptible to its effects. It affected 736,000 people in the Calabarzon region, Central Luzon region and the National Capital regions, and this led to an “evacuation of more than 135,000 residents due to infrastructure and disruption of essential resources and services such as water, food supplies and education.” The displacement and consumption of dangerous gasses have impacted families’ livelihoods and income as well as increasing respiratory problems and malnutrition among the most affected.

Foreign Aid

The Japanese Government donated 425 metric tonnes of rice to the National Food Authority (NFA) to assist those who the natural disaster affected. This is following Japan’s donation of 560 metric tons of rice in 2019 after the Philippines experienced Typhoon Jenny.

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) provided $100,000 in humanitarian support, providing soap, toothbrushes, sleeping mats and blankets for 7,600 displaced residents that were staying at evacuation centers in the Batangas province.

Following the 2020 volcanic eruption, the EU announced a donation of €750,000 to provide humanitarian aid to the Batangas province. With over 931,400 residents in the area the EU’s donation funded the Spanish Red Cross which delivered immediate support through emergency shelters, essential items, hygiene kits and access to clean water. This was alongside psychosocial support services and child protection activities.

Looking Ahead

In the face of the devastating Taal Volcano eruption, international aid and support from countries like Japan, the United States and the European Union have played a crucial role in providing relief to affected communities in the Batangas province. Donations of rice, humanitarian supplies and financial assistance have helped address immediate needs and support the recovery process. These acts of solidarity demonstrate the power of global collaboration in alleviating poverty and rebuilding lives in the aftermath of natural disasters.

– Joshua Rogers
Photo: Flickr

, ,

The Nonprofit That May Have Found the Answer to Effective Foreign Aid

Effective Foreign Aid
GiveDirectly, which four MIT and Harvard students founded in 2012, was donned potentially “the most economically efficient charity ever” by the online magazine The Atlantic. The organization champions unconditional and direct economic investment into the world’s poorest areas, having the potential to alleviate whole areas from poverty within years as well as promote effective foreign aid.

How Does it Work?

In its simplest form, GiveDirectly allows the public to send cash directly to the poorest individuals through bank transfers via mobile phones that they receive from those on the ground. So far, more than $650 million has been donated to 1.4 million people living in poverty. Donors are then able to stay informed about the progress of the individuals they have donated to, with GiveDirectly averaging a 99% follow-up rate from every recipient. The method of this highly effective foreign aid rests on the simple idea that people see a greater improvement in their overall quality of life when they have a say in how recipients spend the money.

Obstacles

GiveDirectly has been battling with the unproven notion that it is not a good idea to give money to those who are poor. This led the organization to conduct its own research into the matter. The research revealed how the extensive benefits of cash transfers often reach beyond a program’s core objectives, facilitating effective foreign aid. The research also found that monetary poverty, education, health and employment all improved as a result of direct injection of cash into poor areas.

Rory Stewart, president of GiveDirectly and former U.K. Secretary of State for International Development, initially had his reservations about GiveDirectly. He stated he thought the best way to approach foreign aid was by “teaching people to fish rather than giving them fish.” However, after his appointment as the president in 2022, he stated on BBC World News that “a relatively small amount of money from Western standards can transform people’s lives so much more rapidly and efficiently than many traditional aid programs.”

Projects for the Future

GiveDirectly functions on an optimistic outlook of human nature and individualism. Individual cash donations allow people to make their own investments, giving dignity to the receiver. Tarkok, a subsistence farmer in Kenya, has been the recipient of $180 over the last 11 days. He “intend[s] to use [the money] to buy at least three bags of 90 kg maize grains that [will] last … for at least six months.” The rest of the money will go toward the purchase of goats. This is just one example of the impact small donations can have on the world’s poor.

Looking Ahead

Rory Stewart’s appointment as president of GiveDirectly last year marks a shift in the world of international development. More than 180 governments have implemented cash programs during COVID-19, marking a decisive step forward to meeting the U.N.’s goal to end global poverty by 2030. GiveDirectly is now the world’s fastest-growing nonprofit, with more than $1 billion raised so far, showing the impact that its new approach is having on foreign aid, alongside alleviating poverty.

– George Somper
Photo: Flickr

Key Facts About UK Aid to India

UK Aid to IndiaThe United Kingdom and India have had a long history of partnership. The two regularly collaborate in fields such as technology, education and trade. The U.K. has also given India valuable aid that has supported its progress and development over the past decades. According to the Independent Commission for Aid Impact, the U.K. supplied India with £2.3 billion in aid between 2016 and 2021. However, in recent years, as India’s economy has flourished, the U.K. has moved away from bilateral aid to the country. Instead, the focus is now on investment that will not only help India but will also yield considerable returns for the U.K. Here’s everything you need to know about the U.K.’s aid to India.

Official Development Assistance (ODA)

The U.K. is a member of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s Development Assistance Committee. And as such, it makes contributions toward ODA. According to the parliament, ODA has the development and welfare of developing countries as its main objective.

In 1970, the U.N. set a target for all countries that supported ODA to donate 0.7% of its gross national income. Before meeting the target for the first time in 2013, the U.K. consistently failed to do so in the years prior. The International Development Act of 2015 only solidified the country’s commitment to this goal. So, for the first time since 2013, the U.K. decided to reduce ODA spending to 0.5% of its GNI due to financial challenges during COVID-19.

Past Efforts: UK Aid to India

The U.K. has been providing aid to India for a while now, but it has gradually shifted its focus over the years. In the past, bilateral aid was the main form of support to India. The U.K. government gave particular importance to social sector programs in India between 2008 and 2011. According to a framework paper, aid focused on “areas such as health, education, rural livelihoods and urban slum improvement” via Indian-government-led programs. The target states for such programs included Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal, Odisha, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar.

In 2011, the U.K. directed its focus to the Indian private sector. According to an accord made in July of that year between the countries, the U.K. provided financial and technical assistance predominantly in Odisha, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh. The government also approved the Private Sector Development Initiative in eight Indian states where the U.K. could provide aid in the form of “returnable capital”.

The U.K. reevaluated its aid strategy again in 2012 and agreed with the Indian government on a new direction for support after 2015. It decided to cease financial grants to government sector programs after 2015. Instead, the country looked to focus on technical cooperation in areas like governance, growth, education and skills, trade and investment and health. The government also pledged to support small entrepreneurial projects which would lead to more opportunities in the private sector.

Changing Priorities

In recent years, the Department for International Development (DFID) and other agencies are investing to modernize and improve the Indian economy. In 2018, out of all the bilateral aid given to India, 85% of it was directed toward economic development. The top three funded programs that year were National Infrastructure Investment Fund, Infrastructure Equity Fund and the Poorest States Inclusive Growth Program.

According to a policy paper, “the U.K.’s support in India is helping stimulate prosperity, generate jobs, develop skills and open up new markets for both countries.” Besides supporting Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 7, 8, 9 and 11, DFID promises results in other areas.

A major focus is on skills training and start-ups. The target is to invest in 50 enterprises, with an estimate to generate 25,000 jobs and yield high returns on investment. DFID will additionally fund urban development for 700,000 people, creating 20,000 jobs and securing around £1 billion in financing.

DFID will also support clean energy in India and potentially yield a return of £6.5 billion for the private sector. It is set to prevent 20 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions by providing clean energy to 1.8 million people. Furthermore, it aims to help 2 million people living in poverty in India deal with drought, flood and extreme heat.

Looking Ahead: UK Aid to India

According to the Independent Commission for Aid Impact, India ranked n0. 11 as the largest recipient of the U.K. bilateral aid in 2021. While this shows that India still receives aid from the U.K., its objective has changed substantially over the past decades, as it has been the “largest recipient of the U.K.’s development investment.”

Out of the £2.3 billion donated to India between 2016 and 2021, £129 million was invested in Indian ventures. British International Investment (BII) also invested £1 billion in the country during that time, representing 28% of its global portfolio. All these investments have been generating profitable returns for the U.K.

In May 2021, the UK government released a policy paper tagged 2030 Roadmap for India-U.K. Future Relations. It contains guidelines that will ensure a deepening partnership with India on issues like trade, defense and clean energy. The U.K. investment in India is creating opportunities in both nations, leading to a more prosperous U.K. While certain sectors still need aid in India, history suggests that effective partnerships and support can uplift the entire nation.

– Siddhant Bhatnagar
Photo: Flickr

,

Sanna Marin’s Defeat and Finland’s Foreign Aid Budget 

Finland’s Foreign Aid
On Monday, April 3, 2023, Finland’s Prime Minister and the world’s former youngest state leader Sanna Marin conceded electoral defeat after her Social Democratic Party (SDP) came in third place to the center-right National Coalition Party (NCP) and the nationalist Finns Party. NCP leader Petteri Orpo is set to be the next prime minister and state leader, as Marin steps aside from her role as party leader. Under her, Finland had a steadfast commitment to the U.N.’s 2030 agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) that aim to end global poverty and create a safer and fairer world. Here is some information about Marin’s record on international development, the fallout from this recent election and what it might mean for Finland’s foreign aid budget.

Foreign Aid Under Marin

Marin has governed as prime minister since 2019 as the leader of the SDP. During this time, she has overseen an increase in the amount Finland spends on fighting poverty in developing nations. In 2018, Finland spent 0.36% of its gross national income (GNI) on Official Development Assistance (ODA). This had increased to 0.47% of GNI by 2021.

A core priority of Finland’s foreign aid is to promote the rights of girls and women worldwide. This is in line with the U.N.’s SDG number 5. Finland has historically been at the forefront of political gender equality. It was the first European country to grant women voting rights. It was also the first in the world to allow them to stand as candidates.

Finland’s proud history of championing women’s rights manifests in its support for women and girls around the world facing extreme poverty. In 2020 Finland spent more than $220 million to promote gender equality and female empowerment in developing nations. As the U.N.’s SDG number 5 has decried, the empowerment of women is not just a basic human right – it is also an incredible catalyst for economic growth and development.

Party Positions

Despite the progress made under Marin, the SDP’s opponents have shown less enthusiasm toward Finland’s humanitarian commitments.

The campaign of the center-right NCP won 20.6% of the vote. It was fought on the promise of reducing government spending and debt. In second place, with 20.1% of the vote, was the nationalist Finns Party. They had previously stated their desire to cut Finland’s foreign aid spending by at least €200 million.

The last time the NCP and the Finns Party were in government together, from 2015 to 2019, they reduced Finland’s spending on foreign aid. However, during the administration’s final year, they began to reverse their cuts to ODA. The Social Democrats embraced this trend.

The third-placed SDP remained committed to increasing the amount Finland spends on international development, campaigning on a promise to keep Finland on the path toward spending 0.7% of GNI on ODA.

Hope for the Future

There remains uncertainty as to whether the far-right Finns Party will constitute the government. The SDP may have come in third place but with 19.9% of the vote, their popularity remains high. It is not unforeseeable that they enter into a coalition government with Orpo’s NCP.

As the biggest party, the NCP will take the lead in attempting to form a new coalition government. They may not share the same enthusiasm for ODA as the SDP, but their party platform confirms its commitment to assisting developing nations and lifting people out of extreme poverty.

In the wake of Marin’s departure, there remains hope that Finland’s history of supporting the world’s poorest will continue. Marin’s time as prime minister reinforced Finland’s global reputation as a leading light in the fight for gender equality and the mission to end global poverty.

– Henry Jones
Photo: Flickr

 

,

Foreign Aid to China

Foreign Aid to ChinaForeign aid to China has played a crucial role in combating poverty. China stands as a long-term receiver and donor of foreign aid due to its rapidly growing economy and desires to sustain its international power. However, China receives less foreign aid than before due to its current classification as an upper middle-income country, with various international relations implications.

General Aid to China

Since the revolution in 1949, foreign aid to China has increased bilaterally and multilaterally, supporting social reform and development initiatives. In terms of foreign relationships and support, international organizations, such as the World Bank, still support China by investing billions in various development projects in transportation, public administration, water and sanitation, agriculture and more.

The United Nations Development Program (UNDP) has also focused on poverty relief in China. For instance, in partnership with the Alibaba Group, the UNDP launched the Rural Taobao project in 2014, which established e-commerce platforms in rural areas to provide access to goods and services that were previously unavailable. This public-private sector collaboration has helped many people in rural areas sell their products online and has created job opportunities for local residents.

Special Projects

Like other countries, China has also received foreign aid from various countries and international organizations, particularly in the aftermath of natural disasters such as earthquakes and floods. For instance, in May 2008, the Singapore Red Cross provided support worth S$150,000 to victims of the Sichuan earthquake, including assistance to meet the shelter, food, water and health care needs of 120,000 people in Lushan county.

In addition to responses to natural disasters, USAID has supported a range of poverty reduction projects in China, such as improving access to clean water and sanitation, supporting the development of small and medium enterprises and strengthening civil society organizations. However, the United States has reduced its foreign aid to China over the years.

This is due to the increasingly tense bilateral relationship between the world’s two superpowers and related geopolitical implications. Instead of having a much larger investment realm, the U.S. has focused aid on Tibetan communities, rule of law initiatives and climate change policy, particularly in areas where international attention and humanitarian assistance are crucial and localized, as these programs align with the values and interests of the United States.

The decision to provide foreign aid to China depends on various factors, including the specific development needs of China and the donor country’s priorities and resources.

Aid From China

In recent years, China has become a large donor of foreign aid itself, particularly to developing countries in Africa and Asia. Since 2000, China has spent $843 billion on bilateral aid, financing 13,427 bilateral aid projects in 165 countries, making it the biggest new player in this domain. The 2021 version of China’s approach to foreign aid and development priorities document “offers high-level principles that China claims to ascribe to.”

Although some concepts are carried over from previous papers, the 2021 version expands on the vision “articulated by its predecessors,” with “many of its new terms seeming to be in direct response to recent critiques of China’s flagship push to fund physical and digital infrastructure overseas through the Belt and Road Initiative.”

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a global infrastructure development strategy the Chinese government proposed in 2013. The initiative aims to connect Asia, Europe and Africa through a network of roads, railways, ports and other infrastructure projects, with the goal of promoting economic development and trade. According to the World Bank, the initiative involves more than 70 countries and represents more than “one-third of the global trade and GDP and approximately 60% of the world’s population.”

The BRI is controversial, with some countries accusing China of using it to expand its global influence and engage in “debt-trap diplomacy.”

A Significant Role in China’s Development History

Foreign aid has played a significant role in China’s development history, with foreign aid to China increasing bilaterally and multilaterally since 1949. However, there has been a significant downward trend in foreign aid to China as China has become a key donor of foreign aid itself.

– Scarlett Ren
Photo: Flickr

,

Aid in the Horn of Africa

Aid in the Horn of Africa
A historically long drought in the Horn of Africa has displaced millions of families while pushing people into poverty and forcing them to resort to extreme measures to ensure their survival. The disregarded effects of extreme weather events, which disproportionately affect poverty-stricken countries and communities, have resulted in very little U.S. congressional action. However, the introduction of a resolution may be the beginning of collective governmental action to provide aid in the Horn of Africa. Rep. Karen Bass [D-CA-37] introduced a resolution (H.Res.1137) for the “drought and endemic food insecurity plaguing the Horn of Africa” in May 2022, acknowledging the role of extreme weather events in the crises afflicting the Horn of Africa.

The Role of US Foreign Aid

The resolution reaffirms the importance of USAID and the role it plays in “meeting humanitarian obligations, cultivating enduring self-reliance in developing nations, ensuring the stability of global financial markets and mitigating the likelihood of conflict in accordance with our national security interests.” Furthermore, the resolution highlights the significance of funding for emergency humanitarian aid in the most disadvantaged countries. “Supporting the development of sustainable agricultural sectors in developing nations and assisting with the international resettlement of refugees escaping droughts and extreme hunger” is also of utmost importance.

The resolution calls on the Biden administration, the Department of State and USAID to take urgent humanitarian action. The U.S. must offer “technical and material assistance, as appropriate and to the extent allowable under Federal law and congressional appropriations,” and must support not only the governments of the countries afflicted but also the organizations aiming to resolve the crisis in the Horn of Africa in order to “alleviate hunger and deliver food aid to communities impacted by the drought in the Horn of Africa.”

While a resolution does not have legal force, it represents the non-binding position of the House or Senate and the Chambers can use it to deal with internal affairs.

The Humanitarian Situation in the Horn of Africa

The Greater Horn of Africa, which consists of  Djibouti, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Uganda, Kenya, Sudan, South Sudan and Somalia, is an Eastern region of Africa with more than 290 million people, according to the World Bank. This region is experiencing a four-year-long drought, largely impacted by the effects of changing weather patterns that continue to worsen over the years. The drought is one of the “most severe and longest” in recent history, the United Nations Population Fund says.

Besides the lack of access to water and food resources, rising food prices and poverty also afflict the region due to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine. This economic crisis and food insecurity create a dangerous combination, resulting in starvation and disease as people have to choose between feeding their families or seeking out health care. Many children are especially vulnerable to disease due to malnutrition and vitamin deficiencies, making them that much more at risk.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is providing vital aid in the Horn of Africa for those who face malnutrition and disease, prioritizing the health sector.

The crisis in the Horn of Africa detrimentally impacts women as they make “perilous journeys with their families to makeshift shelters in formal and informal camps and face long distances to fetch water, heightening their vulnerability to rape, abuse and exploitation,” the UNFPA explains.

With situations becoming so dire, families are resorting to extreme measures to ensure survival. Girls are dropping out of school and child marriage is becoming more prevalent as “marrying off a daughter means one less mouth to feed,” the UNFPA says. A lack of education keeps girls in cycles of poverty and child marriage has detrimental impacts on not only the girls themselves but on entire economies.

The Crisis in Numbers

Overall, according to the WHO, in the Greater Horn of Africa, more than 46 million people within the region are experiencing acute food insecurity. In Djibouti, 400,000 people require aid but these needs are more pronounced in rural areas. With such suffering in the region, many had to relocate or flee the country as 6,086 million people face internal displacement. About 37,000 people have become refugees.

In Ethiopia, the drought is especially impactful with effects on 17 million people out of 292 million. While organizations such as the WHO are providing as much aid as possible, 51% of Ethiopia still lacks health partners and resources. About 20.4 million are suffering from acute food insecurity and almost 5 million people face internal displacement.

This drought could affect exponentially increased numbers of people in Somalia. Between April and June of 2023, the region could face famine with 8.3 million potentially experiencing crisis levels of food insecurity or worse, compared to the 6.7 million Somalis enduring this today. The children of Somalia are harshly impacted, with acute malnutrition predicted to reach 1.8 million children, 513,550 of whom may face severe malnourishment.

The resolution for aid in the Horn of Africa is a strong step in the right direction. More concrete action on the part of the U.S. is necessary to resolve the humanitarian crisis in the most impoverished region of Africa.

– Nixi Hults
Photo: Wikipedia Commons

,

Foreign Aid to Somalia

Foreign Aid to Somalia
Amid a drought, political conflicts and extreme food insecurity, Somalia is facing a severe humanitarian crisis. The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification projected that between January and March 2023, 6.4 million Somalis would endure “crisis” or worse levels of food insecurity. Of these people, 1.9 million individuals would endure “emergency” levels of food insecurity and 322,00 would endure catastrophic levels of food insecurity. Further, through July 2023, about 1.8 million Somali children will suffer acute malnourishment. These statistics are likely to worsen as the year progresses. With the forecasted continuation of a dry spell, foreign aid to Somalia is critical.

Famine, Drought and Poverty

Somalia has faced humanitarian crises since the civil war broke out in the 1990s, continuing to materialize in the famines of 2008, 2011 and 2017.

Droughts and famine have only brought Somalis deeper into crisis as the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) estimated that 260,000 Somalis died on top of expected deaths between the years 2010 and 2012 alone. The population of the country is difficult to precisely calculate due to the mass movement of Somali refugees in response to food insecurity and conflict. In 2018, Somalia stood as the world’s fifth-highest source of refugees, according to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

According to 2014 data, Somalia had only about 0.02 doctors for every 1,000 citizens and a hospital bed density of 0.9 beds per 1,000 people as of 2017. Infectious diseases run rampant, such as hepatitis, typhoid, malaria and polio. Along with food insecurity, Somalia faces problems with water scarcity, deforestation, water contamination and improper waste disposal. Due to political instability and poor governance, terrorism and extremism are prevalent in Somalia. According to Somalia’s Voluntary National Review report of 2022, “Nearly seven out of 10 Somalis live in poverty, the sixth-highest rate in the region. Poverty averages at 69[%] among nomadic pastoralists, agro-pastoralists and [internally displaced persons]” while urban poverty stands at 60%.

US Foreign Aid to Somalia

The U.S. Department of State’s website has reported that U.S. foreign policy in Somalia strives “to promote political and economic stability, prevent the use of Somalia as a safe haven for international terrorism and alleviate the humanitarian crisis caused by years of conflict, drought, flooding and poor governance.”

Since 2006, the U.S. has given more than $3 billion in humanitarian aid and $253 million in developmental aid since 2011. The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) allocated $411 million in December 2022 to respond to the drought and prevent famine in Somalia. In total, the U.S. contributed $1.3 billion in 2022 alone.

More Action

The U.S. can still do more to aid in the Somali crisis. Stephen M. Schwartz, a foreign policy and diplomacy expert and “the first U.S. ambassador to Somalia since 1991,” recommends the United States,  in an article published in the Foreign Policy Research Institute, “apply a whole-of-government approach” to alleviate tensions and extremism, something that could strengthen relations and national security.

He also urges the U.S. to support Somalia by improving corruption, establishing an economic connection between Somalis and U.S. citizens and businesses, accelerating and expanding developmental assistance and continuing efforts for military reform, which would improve quality of life and lessen conflicts.

In November 2022, the United Nations requested 25% more financial aid for 2023 to better aid and continue to fund humanitarian operations globally, highlighting that people in Somalia are already facing hunger-induced mortality.

The World Food Programme (WFP) has also warned about the growing gap between those suffering and response, reporting that it is working to increase its food assistance to benefit 4.5 million people per month, but required “$327 million until January 2023 to continue saving lives.”

In December 2022, UNICEF appealed for $10.3 billion to help more than 173 million people globally, including 110 million children, which would cover the millions of children impacted by famine in Somalia. By increasing funding for this appeal, UNICEF can send sufficient resources to fully meet the humanitarian needs of each struggling country. UNICEF projects that it requires $272.3 million to help the 7.7 million Somalis in need through nutrition, health, education and social protection. As countries continue and increase support financially, foreign aid to Somalia can save the lives of vulnerable people in the country.

– Audrey Gaines
Photo: Flickr