|
Independent research & practical ideas for global prosperity
|
|
|
|
Independent research & practical ideas for global prosperity
|
|
 Posts:March 18, 2010A New CGD Initiative on U.S. Development Strategy in Pakistan: What Is It and Will It Work?By Nancy Birdsall
At CGD, we normally conduct research and analysis on development issues (trade, aid effectiveness, climate change, global health), not developing countries. Pakistan is an exception. Motivated by national security interests, the Obama administration is poised to triple its development assistance to Pakistan. The effectiveness of this new U.S. assistance is imperiled by the same governance problems that have undermined the billions spent by the U.S. and other donors in the last 30 years. Given these challenges, how can the new pledges of U.S. aid to Pakistan be implemented effectively, and what, if any, other policy or program initiatives might matter? To address these questions, we recently launched a new CGD initiative on the U.S. development strategy in Pakistan. As part of this initiative we have convened a study group, comprising leading experts in development economics, national security, aid effectiveness and including several prominent Pakistanis. The study group will meet regularly over the next year to help us prepare periodic open letters to the administration commenting on and hopefully helping improve the assistance program, as well as trade and other U.S. policies aimed at greater security, stability and prosperity in Pakistan. Comment »February 22, 2010A Green Fund: From the IMF, George Soros, and the Government of MexicoBy Nancy BirdsallOn January 30 at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the Managing Director of the IMF, announced a possible new initiative – a multi-billion dollar Green Fund (that name is popular – see below) that would help developing countries finance the measures needed to tackle climate change – possibly with partial funding through issuance by the IMF of new Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). This would be one way of jump-starting the financing of the Green Fund that Mexico has proposed. Of course such a Fund would not need to be “at” the IMF (more on that below). Read More… Comment »February 22, 2010It’s 2010! Ten Actionable Ideas (Realized and Yet-to-be-realized) for a 21st-Century Global Development AgendaBy Nancy Birdsall
7 Comments »February 2, 2010Post-Davos: Reflections on Key Development IssuesBy Nancy BirdsallFinancial regulation – what to do about the banks – dominated the headlines from Davos. But this year development issues were also prominent in one form or another. First, climate change. A cloud analysis of topics of the day at Davos would include in big prominent letters Copenhagen/Climate. I sat in on: A distinguished panel “From Copenhagen to Mexico: What Next?” including Congressman Markey (of the Waxman-Markey House bill), President Calderon, who will host the first post-Copenhagen international meeting of climate negotiators, and Shyman Saran (India’s special envoy on climate), managed a positive spin (but see this take). But as happens when panel members are distinguished and many hold official positions, they skirted one big issue and completely ignored a second one. Both have to do with the troubling differences between developed and developing country positions (and mindsets). The absence of these two issues reflects the primitive state of the dialogue and bodes ill for the 2010 Mexico conference. Read More… Comment »January 28, 2010CGD’s Steve Radelet Joins the U.S. GovernmentBy Nancy Birdsall
For me personally this is a bittersweet moment. Sweet because I know that the U.S. development effort will benefit greatly from everything Steve has to offer, and I trust that he will find new opportunities for carrying on CGD’s spirit in his new role. Indeed, I’ve encouraged such cross-fertilization in our staffing (see, for example, Todd Moss and visiting fellow John Simon). And sad because my colleagues and I will greatly miss having Steve as part of the lively give-and-take that makes CGD such a satisfying place to work. Steve’s scholarship and policy savvy have contributed greatly to the Center’s success over the years. Among his many achievements at CGD, he wrote Challenging Foreign Aid: A Policymakers Guide to the Millennium Challenge Account — quite literally the book on the MCA. Some in the blogosphere have called him, without exaggeration, the architect of the MCA. Steve was a founding co-chair of the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network, which outlined U.S. reform needs. And together with Sheila Herrling he wrote the chapter on U.S. development reform in White House and the World. (Folks working on the PSD and QDDR who have not yet read this will want to make sure that they do!). I am grateful for Steve’s advice and friendship, and I will miss having him as a colleague. At the same time, I am proud that this very senior-level appointment reflects enormously well not only on Steve’s own achievements but also on the reputation of the Center. All of us here wish him all the best in his new endeavor. 1 Comment »December 17, 2009Linking Aid to Results: Why Are Some Development Workers Anxious? (Guest post by Owen Barder)By Nancy BirdsallI am pleased to share with our readers at Owen’s request this discussion of Cash on Delivery Aid, which appeared yesterday on his blog, Owen Abroad. Linking Aid to Results: Why Are Some Development Workers Anxious? The Center for Global Development is working on an idea which they call Cash on Delivery aid, in which donors make a binding commitment to developing country governments to provide aid according to the outputs that the government delivers. I think this is a good idea in principle, and hope that it can be tested to see whether and how it could work in practice. The UK Conservative party have said in their Green Paper that if they are elected they will use Cash on Delivery to link aid to results. Linking aid more closely to results is attractive from many different perspectives. My own view is that linking aid directly to results will help to change the politics of aid for donors. Many of the most egregiously ineffective behaviours in aid are a direct result of donors’ (very proper) need to show to their taxpayers how money has been used. Because traditional aid is not directly linked to results, donors end up focusing on inputs and micromanaging how aid is spent instead, with all the obvious consequences for transactions costs, poor alignment with developing countries systems and priorities and lack of harmonisation. If we could link aid more directly to results, I think donors will be freed from many of the political pressures they currently face to deliver aid badly; and it would be politically easier to defend large increases in aid budgets. 11 Comments »December 16, 2009Copenhagen: Why China is Mostly RightBy Nancy BirdsallChina recently announced it will reduce the emissions-intensity of its economy (ratio of emissions to GDP) by at least 40-45 percent by 2020. But in Copenhagen it is resisting making that promise an internationally binding commitment. That’s a big problem for the U.S. negotiators, since the Congress is adamant: the U.S. will not commit until and unless the Chinese do too. Read More… Comment »December 4, 2009Will There Ever Be Any Serious Reform of World Bank Governance?By Nancy BirdsallAt our recent event with former President of Mexico Ernesto Zedillo, who chaired the High Level Commission on Modernization of World Bank Group Governance on World Bank governance reform (report is here), panelists Moises Naim and Arvind Subramanian worried that there is no reason to expect the powers-that-be to take up any of the recommendations for reform. Read More… Comment »December 1, 2009Mother Earth Lit Up Here but Not Yet ThereBy Nancy Birdsall
Here are two pictures (taken by astronaut Sunita Williams) of mother earth that capture why Arvind Subramanian and I are urging climate negotiators to rethink the narrative in Copenhagen. The picture on the left is the global North – you can see developed countries ringing the largely uninhabited (and unlit) North Pole and lighting the cosmos with their energy output . The picture on the right shows Africa at night – home to over one billion people yet also largely unlit. 1 Comment »November 25, 2009On Nick Kristof, Helping the World’s Poor, and Big AidBy Nancy BirdsallIn a masterful essay this past Sunday on how we can help the world’s poor (that was the title), Nicholas Kristof managed to honor Jeff Sachs (“indefatigable”) and Bill Easterly (“powerful and provocative book”). But he probably has set off another round of the “ferocious intellectual debate” between those two and their adherents. That’s because he didn’t really get to the question the ferocious debate is actually about. 3 Comments »November 20, 2009Please Take the CGD Climate Agreement Survey!By Nancy BirdsallYesterday I sent this letter to CGD contacts who have expressed an interest in our work on development and climate change. But it really should be of interest to all in the development community. If you share my view that climate and development are inextricably intertwined, please read on, take the survey, and tell your friends to take it, too! 1 Comment »November 10, 2009World Bank Governance: Let’s Get Real on Reform and Global Public Goods!By Nancy BirdsallThe central message in last week’s CGD forum featuring former Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo on World Bank governance reform was “let’s get real.” From whom and from where will come any impetus to take up the Zedillo Commission’s good ideas? Answer: G-20, with the United States in the lead. As I said at the forum, one reform should be relatively easy politically. The G-20 should agree to split voting power at the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the wing of the bank that lends to middle-income countries) evenly between developed and developing countries. This shouldn’t be a big deal: it’s already the case at the Inter-American Development Bank and in the World Bank’s own Climate Investment Funds—the multibillion dollar Clean Technology Fund included. The G-20 members should put this on the agenda of the spring 2010 World Bank meeting. Other simple steps I urged include agreeing to scrap the unwritten rule that the World Bank president is necessarily an American; and establishing separate boards for the IBRD and the International Development Association (IDA), the bank wing that lends on highly concessional terms to the world’s poorest countries. 5 Comments »November 5, 2009What’s This About? Aid to Ethiopia? More Troops to Afghanistan? U.S. and Pakistan?By Nancy BirdsallBefore investigating the source of the below quote, read it and guess to what it refers – it might surprise you how broadly applicable it is.
To understand the nature of the dilemma (for foreign aid advocates as a start) go here, and here. Consider the deeper question: Is (soft) aid a substitute or a complement to (hard) security interventions? 4 Comments »October 21, 2009Bipartisan Commission Urges U.S. Leadership on Tropical Forests and Climate ChangeBy Nancy BirdsallFor those interested in the ongoing climate change debate, I urge you to look at the recently-released report (and the Roll Call op-ed) from the bipartisan Commission on Climate and Tropical Forests (full disclosure: I sat on this commission). Read More… 1 Comment »October 20, 2009Depressing News on Rich-World Climate Change AttitudesBy Nancy BirdsallDevelopment advocates hoping for an equitable as well as efficient global agreement on climate change ought to be deeply depressed about the results of a recent FT/Harris poll. What is depressing is the way the question was framed (and that does matter): “Do you agree that, since China is the biggest carbon emitter, it should cut its emissions the most?” In most G-7 countries including the U.S., more than 60 percent of respondents agreed. Read More… 1 Comment »October 20, 2009Attack on The Oil Curse in Nigeria!By Nancy BirdsallNigeria is proposing to transfer a 10 percent stake in the national oil company to delta communities; citizens of the delta would then be entitled to cash benefits, delivered through a trust-type mechanism. Read about it here. That would be a real live breakthrough on a good idea proposed in CGD papers for Iraq and Ghana. 1 Comment »October 14, 2009Belated Reflections from WB-IMF Meetings in Istanbul — What the IFIs Could Learn from the IOCBy Nancy BirdsallSome impressions from the World Bank-IMF meetings, held last week in Istanbul, where the views of the mosques are magnificent and the traffic is truly terrible!
Comment »October 7, 2009Gates Foundation Explores Securitizing AidBy Nancy BirdsallYes that’s right. Securitizing is a bad word nowadays, but in fact it’s a great idea that I’ve written about — as a wishful dream not a possible Gates-sponsored reality. Yet here it is in a recent Economist article: “Or the foundation might provide insurance against the non-payment of aid promised by a donor, so that a government will know that, one way or another, the money will come.” Read More… 1 Comment »September 28, 2009Mismatch between Newly Inclusive G-20 and Limited Changes at the IMF and World BankBy Nancy BirdsallThe big headline from Pittsburgh was the G-20 officially becoming the recognized grouping on “global economic issues”, eclipsing forever the nearly four-decade role of the G-7/8. Presumably that was the quid pro quo for three steps by China: (1) its signing on to the promise in the communique to support for increasing domestic consumption at home to deal with the global imbalance problem; (2) keeping alive that China will find a way to help fill the unfilled gap in the $750 billion to be made available by the G-20 countries to the IMF’s short-term resources; and most important (3) the 5 percent shift in voting power at the IMF to underrepresented countries, which means mostly China. Read More… 3 Comments »September 22, 2009Financing Global Development: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly?By Nancy BirdsallOwen Barder sets out four reasons why innovative aid finance mechanisms are good in a recent terrific blog. They can improve intertemporal optimization (the International Finance Facility for Immunization); create a commitment technology (Advance Market Commitments); change incentives; and improve the allocation of risk. Read More… 1 Comment » |
|
|
CENTER FOR GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT
1800 Massachusetts Avenue NW, Third Floor
Washington DC 20036
Tel 202.416.4000 | Fax 202.416.4050
|
|
|
Print
Share
This is a joint post with 
I attended a conference convened and hosted by 
As many of you who closely track U.S. development policy doubtlessly already know, one of CGD’s first senior fellows, Steve Radelet, joined the U.S. government this week as a senior advisor on development in the office of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. 
First off, congratulations to Liliana Rojas-Suárez, her co-chairs and members of the 
