I recently came across a post by Nancy Birdsall on a new instrument promoted by the Center for Global Development, called ‘Cash on Delivery’ aid. In a way (Nancy, whose Center is a partner of ID4D, might wish to correct me if I am wrong, or complete if need be) it is conceptually close to ‘output-based aid’, except that governments rather than non-governmental actors are in charge of delivering the output, and that aid comes as a form of reward upon delivery rather than a direct payment of the costs incurred. The novel philosophy in this approach is that donors are as ‘hands-off’ as possible - leaving it up to recipient countries to find the most appropriate ways to reach given objectives. In a nutshell, under this type of program donors would commit ex ante to pay a specific amount for a specific measure of progress on a specific objective. In education, for example, donors could promise to pay 100€ or so for each additional child who completes primary school and takes a standardized competency test.

I find this concept appealing in three important ways:

- first, it is serious about ownership: by targeting a specific goal but not interfering in the policy choices, it leads governments to think through the most appropriate ways to reach this objective in their specific national context. Experience has shown that donors don’t always know best.

- second, it shifts incentives away from inputs (how much money do we give?) towards outputs (what concrete results do we achieve?), and clearly places the onus of results on governments. If pilot projects are set up, they will teach us important things about how public choices are made within governments, and to what extent they influence performance. For one thing, there is likely to be more public scrutiny and debate on the decisions made to ‘win’ the challenge - which may be a positive result in itself.

- this leads me to a third interesting dimension, which is the underlying ambition of changing the structure of the incentives. Cash on delivery works on supply-side incentives. Other initiatives (targeted at young girls in India, but also at public school students in Washington DC!) have worked on education through the demand-side, by paying children to attend and get good grades. Comparing the successes of demand-side and supply-side incentives in the field of education could teach us a lot on the determinants of progress.

Yet I also have my concerns (aside from obvious technical difficulties of finding agreed and verifiable benchmarks of ‘success’, which are important to think through but can probably be overcome):

- how will the governments attain results if aid isn’t there in the first place? This is a typical ‘chicken and egg’ problem: some countries do not have the budgetary space to ‘invest’ in the big push that would be needed to attain the objectives initially. These programmes would therefore need to be complementary to existing programs (such as the Fast Track initiative in education).

- secondly, Cash on delivery is a form of (ex-post) conditional aid. As a reward to good performers, it risks imposing a double penalty on populations whose governments are incapable of delivering. And by penalizing ‘poor performers’, it makes the implicit assumption that they are responsible for their bad results. Although this may be the case, it cannot be taken for granted. Like many good ideas, it should therefore probably be consumed moderately; we cannot hope to apply it uniformly and across the board.

In any case, this is interesting new stuff, which definitely merits to be discussed in the columns of this blog. Dear fellow blog members, guest commentators and readers, the floor is yours!

JMS

Exchange with the members of the blog, live from the 3rd edition of the European Development Days, Europe’s first meeting of development cooperation practitioners and decision-makers that will take place in Strasbourg on the 15-17 November. On this occasion, laptop computer will be available on the French Presidency stand so you will be able to participate to the debate. The members present in Strasbourg will come to the stand to react in live to your comments. Come and share your thoughts on the topic.

Read more…

Demographic growth, industrialisation and the increase of demand resulting from higher living standards is exerting growing pressure on the world’s natural resources. The effects of climate change are also showing their first impacts on some of the regions of the world that are least equipped to manage them. How can these pressures be handled on the long run? What role can public policies play to tackle this rising challenge?

On the occasion of the 6th AFD/EUDN conference on “Population and natural resources: managing pressure”, I evoke in this brief video clip the dual challenge of mounting environmental pressure and demographic explosion in Sub-Saharan Africa – that I think has not sufficiently made its way at the front of the development community’s preoccupations. I also attach some of my recent publications on these two topics, as well as a recent study on the trends of African demographics. I am looking forward to reading your thoughts and experiences on this crucial issue.

Jean-Michel

Read more…

Although the United Nations always has crises to solve, delegates at this year’s UN General Assembly (UNGA) in New York seemed to have an exceptional number on their plates. With America’s financial turmoil creating a bleak backdrop, the gathering seemed to hum with palpable angst about the future. One world leader after another strode to the podium to tell how high food and fuel prices were devastating the poor in their countries – and threatening to reverse economic growth and the significant gains we have made in fighting poverty. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warned

Read more…

Some time ago I met with leaders of several NGOs from a ‘Debt and Development Platform’. The quality of our exchanges gave me the idea to continue our discussions on debt here with you.

Read more…

The failure to reach an agreement in Geneva has severely weakened the Doha round. What could be the consequences of a collapse of the Doha negotiation from the perspective of developing nations?

Read more…

Last month, I spoke to a group of British parliamentarians who sit on something called the International Development Committee. Their role is to scrutinise the work of the Department for International Development. ”DFID” – as it is known - is the arm of the British government concerned with promoting development, supporting the alleviation of poverty across the globe, and funding multilateral organisations like the UN World Food Programme.Members of the International Development Committee asked me to travel to London to speak to them as part of their inquiry into the work of the World Food Programme (WFP) and the support it receives from DFID. As part of the inquiry, an open invitation was issued to any organisation or individual with an interest in global food security to contribute written evidence.

These few lines came to my mind after one of our Board of Directors’ meetings devoted, among other things, to a new participation in an important microfinance institution in Morocco - a country famous for its involvement in the sector. I have, for a long time, been an avid supporter of microfinance. And I am particularly proud of the important increase in the amount of investments made in this sector by my organization, AFD, over the past 20 years: through 60 projects and nearly 300 million euros invested, we have helped more than 1.5 million people make their way out of poverty. We now want to go further, encouraged in this by GCAP’s very positive evaluation of our involvement. I see microfinance as a powerful tool against exclusion; it allows people who have been traditionally excluded from the financial systems to have access to credit. Great tribute must be paid to the pioneers of this revolutionary approach.

Read more…

Having just returned from Senegal, I want to share my thoughts with you on an issue that became strikingly clear to me: the favorable perspectives shaping up for Africa’s agriculture and their complex implications for future energy choices.

While traveling through the irrigated rice production area in the Senegal River Valley, you could see the new opportunities that rising world prices of agricultural commodities could bring to African agriculture. The changes in Senegal are down right impressive. To be sure, the dramatic upturn in world prices is spawning many challenges for net importers of agricultural commodities and for the World Food Program, as Josette Sheeran so emphatically points out in this blog. In addition, it is creating a fair amount of social and political tension in some urban areas. In order to be beneficial for all, this price surge must therefore incite cities to become better suppliers and service providers to their rural peripheries, so that cities also reap the benefits of improving conditions in rural areas. (I will come back to this fundamental relationship in another column.)
I am convinced that if managed intelligently, the rise in world prices can offer real long term opportunity for Africa’s economic development. The prices for African products are once again attractive, and this is opening up new commercial opportunities for both food and export crops. The Senegalese farmers I encountered are starting to invest again, a sure sign of better days to come.

All bets point to a trend of rising agriculture prices that will continue through the coming years. Of course there is an element of speculative buying at present price levels. Current market volatility makes corrections not unlikely, and is a surefire guarantee of short-term price fluctuations, which could prove a bit dicey. But several structural factors (rising demand for agro-fuels, world-wide demographic growth, increasingly meat-based diets, and climate imbalances) indicate that the trend will continue, and this will significantly raise the returns on investments. African agriculture, which has enormous potential, could greatly benefit from this trend in both the short- and mid-term.

The Senegal River Valley offers a perfect example of an agricultural zone where margins of productivity are still quite wide. Irrigated areas could be expanded even further, given abundant water resources, improving technical capacities of traditional farmers, and a rapidly modernizing agro-industry (the latest irrigation technologies, increasingly productive tools). With major investments in infrastructure, Senegal has the capacity to create near perfect conditions for developing a highly competitive agricultural sector in the Valley. Current price trends combined with expanded irrigation capacities, in a country where the agricultural sector already accounts for 18% of the economy, could translate into a highly stabilizing dynamic for the national economy. The same could also be said for other regions, such as Mali, where irrigated agriculture in the Office du Niger zone still offers considerable potential.

But the indispensable expansion of agricultural production in Africa makes the energy capacity a growing problem. Indeed, any modernization in production methods presupposes sustainable access to energy. It is needed for pumping water, exporting food-stuffs, and ensuring effective cold chain facilities for storing and distributing perishable goods. This question made more pressing by the energy crisis currently sweeping the continent. In recent years, this crisis has shaved economic growth for West African countries by 1 - 1.5 percentage points. Senegal’s electricity sector is particularly affected where, even as I write, supply is still falling short of the 8% to 10% annual increase in demand. As for local farmers, they fear that rising energy prices will offset the benefits of rising agriculture prices.

This raises a touchy issue: the choices nations must make in terms of their energy policy. In fact, the current reality of high global energy prices could be the incentive for many African countries to turn to new energy sources. The most rational choice would obviously be to start immediately promoting the development of renewable energy (wind, solar, biomass, hydroelectricity), whether it be for reasons of environmental protection, energy independence, mid-term price competiveness, or the logic of preserving exhaustible resources. But this raises the dilemma of “unfair competition” from fossil fuels, which are lower cost investments and have the advantage of being immediately available, and often are largely subsidized.

This brings us to the fundamental question: Can Africa wait for clean energy given that current trends are offering immediate opportunities for economic growth? Does this question not pit long-term environmental logic against short-term growth logic? In light of our own past energy choices in the developed world, can we legitimately tell Africans that they should not acquire polluting power plants, even if necessary for responding to their pressing energy needs? Do they really the choice of going either for equipment that is readily available and still rather inexpensive or energy options that are wiser in the long-term (including for economic growth) but that are currently very costly and technically more complicated to set up?

While we should not wait any longer to promote renewable energy sources, their effective implementation corresponds to a long-term objective. And it’s quite obvious that developing countries will be unable to handle the entire technical, financial and operational burden on their own. This is why we must offer long-term help by extending financial and technical support to both public and private players. The experience of developed countries could be effectively transferred gradually with the goal of anticipating future needs. But given the scope of immediate global food needs and the commercial opportunities that are available now, we simply can not deny Africa a right to economic growth. An approach that balances short-term economic opportunities and promotes emerging environmental standards seems therefore to be the smartest choice.

Senegal’s electricity sector reforms offer a good example of such an approach. This ambitious project, supported by AFD, consists of a sector recovery plan (2007-2012) based on financial and institutional restructuring. It promotes bolstering electricity output and seeking new investments, as well as a policy that discourages waste and encourages energy efficiency. In addition, the reforms are coupled with a political will to develop renewable energy sources in Senegal, a country where 80% of energy output is currently thermal. Three massive regional hydroelectric projects also are going to be implemented, and several production units devoted to solar and wind energy will be created.

If effectively managed, these reforms will enable Senegal to sidestep the unfortunate position of having to choose between economic growth and environmental concerns.

JMS

Is it fair to ask developing countries companies to follow the rules of Corporate Social Responsibility considering that our countries have developed themselves without such constraints? Would you consider CSR as a form of protectionism?

Read more…