Posts

, , , , ,

5 Countries That Show Development Assistance is a Two-Way Street

Development AssistanceThe Development Assistance Committee (DAC) is a division of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). It facilitates economic development worldwide, partly by providing financial assistance to developing countries. The DAC currently has 30 members, including the U.S., Japan and the European Union. According to analysis organization DevelopmentAid, 155 countries received development assistance from these members and of other non-member donors in 2018.

Development Assistance Programs

Official Development Assistance (ODA) distributes financial assistance annually to low-income, lower-middle- and upper-middle-income status countries. Eligibility is based on national per capita income. Countries transcend eligibility once they exceed the high-income threshold set by the World Bank for three consecutive years.  The highest Gross National Income (GNI) was $12,376 as of 2018.

Many countries have graduated from being ODA recipients to become donors themselves. Researchers from the Overseas Development Institute found countries become donors when possible both out of morality and the recognition that aid can “lubricate commercial, trade and investment opportunities” for a donor country. But, it’s not just high-income countries that recognize this. Some nations have become development donors even while still being ODA recipients. Below are five such countries that are both aid donors and recipients simultaneously, proving foreign aid is often a two-way street.

Five Countries That Prove Foreign Aid is a Two-Way Street

  1. Brazil. With a 2019 GNI of $9,130 dollars, Brazil is an upper-middle-income country. It is an ODA recipient, receiving about $430 million in net ODA and official aid in 2018. According to the data organization Development Initiatives, Brazil’s biggest donors are Japan, Norway and Germany. Most of its ODA capital is directed to improving water and sanitation, agriculture and food security and infrastructure. However, Brazil has long been a donor nation, too. In 2010, the Brazilian government found that from 2005-2009 the country invested “more than $1.8 billion dollars into international development” efforts. In 2010 alone, Brazil disbursed $1 billion in aid abroad. One year later, it received that same amount itself in ODA financing. Brazil’s donations largely go to Latin America, the Caribbean and sub-Saharan Africa, particularly for peacekeeping and humanitarian purposes.
  2. South Africa. South Africa is an upper-middle-income ODA recipient with a 2018 GNI of $5,750. It received about $915 million in net ODA and official aid in 2018. In 2011, it received $1.5 billion, but it disbursed $209 million, according to Development Initiatives. Accurate assessments of total contributions and contribution breakdowns are hard to acquire because South Africa’s foreign aid programs are managed by various government organizations. Nevertheless, the country has several successful programs like the African Renaissance and International Cooperation Fund, which have steadily increased contributions since launching in 2001. South Africa’s foreign aid primarily fosters development across Africa. Conversely, as an ODA recipient, the country gets most of its ODA aid from the U.S., EU Institutions and Germany. It is directed primarily toward health issues.
  3. India. As of 2018 data, India is considered a lower-middle-income country. Its GNI for 2019 was $2,130, an all-time high for the country. However, as a nation far from the high-income threshold, it still receives substantial foreign aid. In 2018, it received $2.45 billion in ODA and official aid. The biggest ODA donors to India are the International Development Association, Japan and Germany. These funds are primarily spent on improvements in infrastructure, health and education. However, in 2011, while India took the third-largest share of ODA aid with $5.4 billion received, it also became the sixth-largest non-DAC member donor country. It disbursed $787 million toward international development cooperation. India’s contributions primarily support technical and economic development in Africa. 
  4. Chile. Chile was removed from the ODA eligibility list in 2018, having reached high-income status. It remained at $14,670. However, before achieving this status, Chile’s international development cooperation had been bilateral. The country was helping other nations throughout the world. Though its main beneficiaries are in Latin America and the Caribbean, Chile disburses money to a variety of areas for various purposes as needed. For example, it contributed $100,000 toward the crisis in Syria. The OECD estimated that in 2010, Chile’s overall contributions reached $42 million. However, it still received ODA at that time. In 2012, Chile was an upper-middle-income country and received $126 million in net ODA, largely from France and European Union institutions.
  5. Indonesia. With a 2018 GNI of $3,840, Indonesia is a lower-middle-income country that received just under $950 million in ODA and official aid in 2018. In 2011, Indonesia received $3.7 billion, making it the tenth-largest recipient of ODA. Japan is its largest donor. Almost 25% of all aid goes toward improving the country’s infrastructure. Despite still receiving such a large amount of foreign aid, Indonesia is seeing some growth. ODA’s share of national GNI has steadily decreased while government spending has increased. Moreover, in 2019, Indonesia created the Indonesian Agency for International Development to ramp up the country’s own participation in foreign aid. The agency will manage a $283 million endowment fund the government has set aside for development cooperation.

Development assistance benefits both national and global economies because it allows countries that don’t have sufficient funds internally to build domestically as well as participate in trade with other nations. This supports the logic in development aid flowing both ways in several countries. Brazil, South Africa, India, Chile and Indonesia are just five countries that exemplify such a circumstance.

– Amanda Ostuni
Photo: Wikimedia

, , ,

8 Facts About Education in Uruguay

8 Facts About Education in Uruguay
Uruguay is a country of around 3.4 million on the east coast of South America. Uruguay’s government has invested highly in its public education system, as evidenced by its high literacy rate of 98.6 percent for the population, progressive policies for equitable education and free college. This article highlights 8 facts about the current picture of education in Uruguay in addition to education policy.

8 Facts About Education in Uruguay

  1. Primary, secondary and public university education are free of cost. The affordability of public education is largely responsible for Uruguay’s high literacy rate of 98.6 percent, roughly comparable to that of the United States.
  2. Unlike the Organisation for Economic Cooperation (OECD) countries, an autonomous administration creates and implements Uruguay’s education policies rather than a ministry of the executive branch. This means that Uruguay has a highly centralized education system with the National Public Education Administration (ANEP) overseeing all public schools from preschool through university. The Ministry of Education and Culture regulates only private preschools and private universities; the ANEP creates all public education policy.  However, ANEP does not clearly define the role of the central authority as opposed to the many sectorial education councils, and therefore, there is a lot of internal competition that results in bureaucratic inefficiency.
  3. Education is compulsory from ages six to 11, and thus, the Uruguayan people have universally achieved primary education. All children in Uruguay receive a free primary school education and the majority of children also receive a non-compulsory preschool education at ages four and five.
  4. Less than one-third of Uruguayans complete secondary school and this rate is increasing more slowly than in other Latin American countries. In 2017, only 56 percent of adults over 25 had a middle school education in Uruguay, and only 30 percent had graduated from secondary school.
  5. The average Uruguayan will spend 16 years in school, but they will also repeat grades. Both Uruguayan and American students will spend an average of 16 years in school, but Uruguay’s grade repetition rate is high compared to other Latin American and international countries. Grade repetition is why students in Uruguay will spend so long in school, but still, only half will finish middle school.
  6. Students from low socioeconomic backgrounds complete school at much lower rates, but the government has responded by placing a heavy emphasis on social equity in education policy. Uruguay has increased funding and resources for low-income primary and secondary schools, as well as introduced targeted programs for at-risk students to encourage them to stay in school.
  7. Uruguay has invested heavily in its education system, but emigration has prevented the country from reaping the rewards of this investment. Some of the most successful students choose to leave Uruguay for better career prospects in the United States or Spain. Currently, around 18 percent of Uruguayans live abroad.
  8. Uruguay’s student-teacher ratio is one of the lowest in the world. With a classroom student-teacher ratio of 13.8 to one, Uruguay approaches the small classroom sizes of countries like Sweden and Iceland. Small class sizes often contribute to greater student success as they allow for every student to have more one-on-one attention from the teacher.

Uruguay’s education system is far from perfect, but the government has worked hard to promote education, make it accessible to all and empower those with fewer resources to gain an education as well. Overall, the country still has work to do, but its education system has achieved a lot of success and every year more people graduate with high school and college degrees than the last.

– Macklyn Hutchison
Photo: Flickr

,

Top 10 Facts About Hunger and Nutrition in Austria

Hunger and Nutrition in Austria
After decades of making strides in the fight against hunger and food insecurity, hunger is on the rise. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) reported that the number of undernourished people has risen. Around 821 million people were undernourished around the world in 2017, up from 804 million in 2016.

This article will address the top 10 most interesting facts about hunger and nutrition in Austria. Austria, like many other European nations, is lucky to have the socioeconomic ability to provide basic needs to most of their citizens, but Austria is not without flaws. These flaws will be addressed, as well as the progress Austria has made in its fight against hunger and malnutrition.

Top 10 Facts About Hunger and Nutrition in Austria

  1. Agricultural Land
    Austria has a very low amount of agricultural land. This land, defined by the OECD as “land area that is either arable, under permanent crops, or under permanent pastures” is necessary for a country to grow its own food. Because Austria does not have a large amount of agricultural land, the nation relies on imports. Best Food Importers names Austria as one of the most important food importers, with a constant need for imports of fruits and vegetables.
  2. Buying Local Food
    Not only does Austria have a comparably small amount of agricultural land, but it also faces more problems in the fight for food security for its local populations. Due to land-grabbing, local populations find it more difficult to buy locally, hence Austria’s aforementioned need to import food. However, Austria’s government is taking steps to fix parts of the problem. The Austrian Development Agency (ADA) has shown support for sustainable and fair land-use policies by supporting land rights for local populations and inclusion of disadvantaged populations in decision-making.
  3. Dietary Choices
    Austrians consume more saturated fatty acids and salt than the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) recommends. Austrians consumed 12.7 percent of their total calorie intake from saturated fatty acids; the FAO recommends 10 percent. The FAO recommends 5 grams of salt intake a day. Austrian men, by average, consumed 9 grams of salt a day, and Austrian women consumed 8 grams per day.
  4. Obesity Rates
    In 2008 estimates, approximately 60 percent of Austrian men were found to be overweight, compared to the 48.5 percent of Austrian women being overweight. However, in terms of obesity, men and women seem to be nearly equal with 21 percent of Austrian men being considered obese, and 20.9 percent of Austrian women being obese. By 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) predicts that obesity numbers should rise to 25% for both men and women, and is predicted to steadily rise after that as well. This is a very important nutritional fact that needs to be corrected by the Austrian government.
  5. Stacking Up Against Other Nations
    Even though those numbers seem exceptionally high, when comparing these numbers to other Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OCED) member countries, Austria ranks very well. Austria self-reported that in 2014, 46.7 percent of its population over 16 years of age were overweight or obese. How does this compare to the other OECD countries? The United Kingdom’s overweight and obese population stands at 61.4 percent of its population over the age of 16, while the U.S. self-reported numbers of 65.1 percent of its 16+ population as obese or overweight, but it’s been measured to actually be 70 percent. Italy and Norway were the only European countries that measured better than Austria.
  6. Good Nourishment Rates
    Austria’s undernourishment percentages are low compared to the world average. In both 2000 and 2016, Austria’s prevalence of undernourishment was measured at 3 percent of its population. Currently, 10.6 percent of the world’s population is undernourished. This is once again, a place where nutritionally speaking, Austria is doing very well compared to other nations, but progress can continue to be made.
  7. 7. Food Security
    According to the Global Food Security Index, Austria ranks 14th in the index of the most food-secure countries in the world. Though in 2014 it was ranked as second, 14th still shows that Austria is still very food secure in comparison to most of the world. Affordability of food is Austria’s highest score, ranking 8th in affordability.
  8. Food Quality
    According to Oxfam, Austria ranks 4th overall on their list of 125 countries and their performance in the realm of supplying enough well quality food for its people. Austria was only ranked lower than France, Switzerland and the Netherlands. Providing enough to eat, as well as providing high-quality food boosted Austria into the 4th place ranking.
  9. Water Quality
    Water in Austria is perfect. Austria provides 100 percent safe drinking water to 100 percent of its people. The water quality in Austria is superb as Austria has very strict environmental protection laws. Clean water is necessary for a healthy diet for many reasons, one of them being that the quality of food that can be provided to a population is dependent on the quality of water that went into the process of growing that food.
  10. ADA Efforts
    The ADA is doing its part in aiding countries that struggle with doing the same for their own populations. The ADA aids in water sanitation projects in countries such as Albania and Uganda. Not only are Austrian’s governmental agencies aiding in the fight for universal clean water, but NGOs such as CAREAustria are aiding in the fight as well. For example, CAREAustria has helped bring sanitation technology to parts of Ethiopia that have been damaged by violence and turmoil.

Hunger and Nutrition in Conclusion

As represented by the facts above, Austria does have some flaws within its fight against poor nutrition and hunger. High import rates and less sustainability is a problem, as is consuming too many unhealthy nutrients. All of these problems can be fixed by including both rural and urban populations in decision-making processes, as well as educating the populations on what a healthy diet looks like. And with the progress Austria has already made in providing high-quality food and water, as well as very affordable food prices, there does not seem to be a reason the progress Austria has made in the fight against hunger and poor nutrition won’t continue.

– Kurt Thiele
Photo: Flickr

,

Education in Moldova Shows Encouraging Improvement

Education in MoldovaEducation in Moldova includes five tiers. Students enter school at the age of six and graduate at 17, and the school year runs from September to July, similar to American school systems. Introduction to the educational system begins with primary school until age 10. Secondary education is split into lower and upper secondary cycles. Lower secondary, grades five to nine, is called gymnasium. Gymnasium graduates must pass an entrance exam to qualify for Lyceum before admittance.

Upper secondary—or lyceum—includes grades 10 through 12. Graduating from lyceum qualifies students to receive their “Scoala Medie de Cultră general,” or general certificate of completion. Students may also be awarded a Diploma de Bacalaureat if they opt to take and pass the national baccalaureate exam.

Higher education is offered by both private and public universities, academies and institutes. Getting a degree from any of these can take four to five years depending on the chosen upper secondary education. Undergraduate, Masters and Doctoral studies are also available.

The Moldovan Constitution guarantees that state public education be free and all citizens have the right to access to education. Higher education in Moldova is more or less free. Tuition fees for students living off-campus is an average of 5000 Moldovan Lei, or $280.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) occurs every three years in order to test the effectiveness of education in Moldova, with a two-hour-long exam on math, science and reading for 15-year old students. The program is a global effort that engages over half a million students from 72 countries in order to evaluate education systems worldwide.

PISA encourages the development of facilitative learning environments and improved educational systems for low and middle-income countries and aims for inclusive learning for all students. PISA is designed to assess students’ ability to apply what they have learned in school to real-life situations. The organization’s main goal is to measure a country’s effectiveness in preparing students for success in higher education and a professional career.

In 2009, Moldova scored below average in all areas of study according to PISA test results. However, in 2015, Moldovan students had a 15-point increase in the sciences, a 28-point increase in reading and a 23-point increase in math. Equity rankings between boys and girls and social backgrounds are about equal.

In 2013, the Moldovan government devised and instituted pivotal changes that may be responsible for improved scores: increased funding and academic accountability. Increased financing for public educational institutions has undoubtedly improved conditions.

The implementation of the Education Management Information system (EMIS) which includes information about a school’s ranking and performance marks, has motivated schools to improve their quality of education. This also allows parents to make informed decisions when choosing a school for their child.

The students’ PISA scores offer a hopeful insight into education in Moldova. Although it may not be the best, it is improving.

– Sloan Bousselaire

Photo: Flickr