Foreing Aid

In the light of World Bank and other studies concluding aid does not correlate with development or poverty reduction in recipient countries do you think the rich world and international agencies should halt all further monetary assistance to developing states? Why and why not?

As it was mentioned in the article, there was no evidence for the relationship between foreign aid and development in recipient countries. I also think that development is a complex definition and it is hard to attribute everything for foreign aid when it does a little to the economic growth of these countries. Economic growth is consisted of many factors such as technology, education, gdp etc and most important is the effort from these countries. Even if the money flows from rich countries, the government of recipient also plays an important role in managing and controlling the money. As the main failure of foreign aid is corruption and bad economic policies. However, it does not mean that foreign aid is not helpful for poor countries. We know many countries— Botswana, Korea, more recently, Uganda, Mozambique—that have received large amounts of aid flows that have done very well. We know that aid for health has done reasonably well in eliminating smallpox and getting oral rehydration therapy to millions of children to getting immunization rates out. That doesn’t mean that aid has been successful in all places. It certainly hasn’t. It’s been wasted and thrown away. But it also improves the health care system in these countries although income and economic growth has not increased much. The most remarkable event happened on 18th December: Copenhagen conference, USA announced a major funding initiative with a promise to contribute to a global fund of $100 billion annually to help poor nations deal with climate change. The rich countries can contribute to the global issue such as environmental problem by helping poor countries with a fund with climate change.

To conclude, foreign aid is an...