DP:International Aid – should change the current model?

Continuing with the evolution of the Blog today, I am starting to develop some exciting topics connected to Sustainable Development, one of the primary axes of IMSD; therefore, I am continuing as promised in my previous post.

Today the world still has a significant economic and social division between the “developed” and the “undeveloped” countries. If we take into account the studies being done at present to define these categories, we would get endless options to define them. Nevertheless, an idea that I recently saw on the web and has seduced me significantly was from Hans Rosling, a Swedish Professor of International Health. During one’s of his studies, he speaks about human evolution taking into account two extremely important indicators: Per Capita Income and Life Expectancy.

Imagen de previsualización de YouTube

If we take into account these indicators to evaluate the International Aid Model, we would consider the Per Capita Income is represented by the “developed” countries or those who had strong Aid participation (donor’s countries), to the “undeveloped” countries that are those were the Life Expectancy is an issue that has not been solved yet. This is example shows that the “International Aid Model” has been not effective because the countries by themselves do not evolutes in a proper way if they follow this path.

If we look more deeply we ask, what does Humanitarian Aid to developing countries generate? Is this the best way to help developing countries? Is the benefit short or long term?

According to the report “Global Humanitarian Assistance Report 2012“, International Aid can be focused on four main areas:

Poverty: The inability to generate a welfare state that ensures basic access to the primary needs of human beings: food, health and education.

Conflicts: Associated to military situations in countries that affect the primary needs of human beings. These are probably already put in place by the governments, however, due to conflict situations; they can be seen significantly diminished.

Natural Disasters: Unexpected events with great social impact of involvement on infrastructure and human beings deprived of access to basic needs.

State Fragility: Linked to countries who a weak state legitimacy, and also has not the infrastructure to ensure the access to primary needs to their inhabitants.

As you see the International Aid is focused on primary needs, but what about development?

Reviewing the data related to humanitarian Aid on recent years, it is interesting to note that each year is declining slightly disbursements of money on humanitarian issues but notes that some countries that have benefited from this Aid has not had major progress in overcoming their specific situations, examples such as Haiti and Pakistan (Earthquake – Natural Disaster) African (Famine – Poverty)

That is why in my opinion the humanitarian Aid by itself are not the way for nations to develop properly, the world order is changing and we need to think Long-Term, because humanitarian Aid are based on contingency measures, to ensure that the Short-term residents of the affected areas have access to food and primary health issues.

From my perspective, I would asseverate that we may go into a new development scheme in regions affected or delayed in this process, this fact is critical. We need to reinforce and restructure the model of humanitarian Aid as a generator of changes in society, and leave behind the model needs to satisfy depleted in the short run products specific situations.

Change is non-negotiable, the road to development is marked by eradicating poverty worldwide, not only in countries that have internal product development to benefit their own people.

Right now we are 7 billion people and by 2050 we will be 9 billion, if we do not change the current model as humanitarian Aid, how we are going to deal with the global population growth?

 

 


Suscribirse a comentarios Comentarios | Trackback |

Comentarios ( 1 Comentario )

Carlos, I am really interested to see what your next post on this topic will bring!

As we discussed in class with David Sanderson, the challenge in the transition between helping people meet their basic needs, and then gain further long term development seems difficult. It makes me think about his diagram and how much of it is linked to that “lock” that governance must control and maintain…

I am excited to see your views in your upcoming post!

Amy Blyth enviado el 04/01/13 00:54

Enviar comentario

Debe identificarse para enviar comentarios.


Uso de cookies

Este sitio web utiliza cookies para que usted tenga la mejor experiencia de usuario. Si continúa navegando está dando su consentimiento para la aceptación de las mencionadas cookies y la aceptación de nuestra política de cookies, pinche el enlace para mayor información.plugin cookies