"Congressman Berman has long sought to make reform of US government global development programs a priority," said Raymond C. Offenheiser, President of Oxfam America. "Reform is necessary to restore America's leadership in fighting global poverty. Both he and Congressman Kirk should be applauded for identifying reform as one of America's top foreign policy challenges."
"With the right reforms, the US foreign assistance system can help poor people get the tools they need to lead their own development, spur economic growth and create a more prosperous world for everyone. This bill is an important first step to making sure the United States has the right tools to fight global poverty."
The bill, the Initiating Foreign Assistance Reform Act of 2009, focuses on three critical areas of foreign assistance reform: creating a US national strategy for global development, refocusing its monitoring and evaluation approach, and increasing transparency on where assistance dollars are going.
"Creating a national strategy for global development will help coordinate our disjointed US foreign assistance system, establish poverty reduction as its primary goal and provide developing countries and their citizens more ownership over their own development agenda," said Offenheiser. "By taking the time to listen to the poor people and countries we are trying to help, and by giving them more control over their own futures, US foreign assistance is more likely to make a long-lasting impact."
Tracking funding and ensuring assistance dollars are getting to people in need is one the biggest challenges facing US foreign assistance programs said Oxfam. There has been little chance to date that developing countries could get critical information needed to plan effectively for their own development projects. The portions of the bill focused on transparency promise US taxpayers and developing countries long-awaited clarity on how foreign assistance dollars are being distributed.
"Greater transparency in US foreign assistance programs is an important step to creating true partnerships with developing countries and their citizens," said Offenheiser. "When developing countries get access to information they need to effectively plan their own futures, they are empowered to work alongside the US as equal partners."
The monitoring and evaluation portion of the bill is a promising effort to change an antiquated model of gauging success. For too long, the US has focused on counting things like how many individuals went through a one-off agricultural training workshop rather than how much more food was produced locally to meet the needs of a community.
"Washington needs to stop bean-counting when it comes to judging the success of US foreign assistance. We need to be looking at how many more girls are getting an education because of US foreign assistance, and how their lives are improved, not just how many pencils are sharpened or textbooks are bought."
"President Obama has already expressed a commitment to making our foreign assistance dollars as effective as possible. Chairman Berman's 'down payment' on foreign assistance reform helps us get there," said Offenheiser.
]]>In the response to the report, Raymond C. Offenheiser, president of Oxfam America, made the following statement:
"The State Department was asked to solve a complicated leadership and political problem with management tools like databases.
US foreign assistance doesn’t just need databases right now. What it needs to become more effective is someone to step up and lead us out of this quagmire.
We are starting to see this leadership. Secretary Clinton has made it clear US foreign assistance needs a fresh start. Congressman Berman is promising some eagerly anticipated legislation on aid reform.
This new leadership has the opportunity to deliver a National Strategy for Global Development that will reign in a sprawling assistance program, focus US foreign assistance on reducing global poverty and give poor people more control over their own futures."
Learn more about Oxfam America's aid reform initiative.
]]>The rise in numbers—from the current 250 million per year to 375 million by 2015—is due to the increasing threat of climate change-induced severe weather events and inability of millions of people worldwide to prepare to deal with such catastrophes. In the report, The Right to Survive, Oxfam America recommends adequate and urgent investments in climate change adaptation and an overhaul of the current system of humanitarian assistance in order to meet the challenge of more frequent and devastating disasters.
"Entrenched poverty in many parts of the world makes people more vulnerable to disasters," said Raymond C. Offenheiser, President of Oxfam America. "Climate change is already threatening our work to overcome poverty, and now it is increasing the pressure on our relief work. It is crucial that we tackle global warming head on by cutting dangerous greenhouse gas emissions, but we must also invest in community preparedness to cope with climate-related disasters."
According to the report, the international humanitarian system must change the way it delivers aid, with a focus on helping build countries’ ability to prepare and withstand future shocks. The report recommends increased humanitarian aid to ensure there is adequate funding to support timely, effective, and good-quality humanitarian action. In addition, Oxfam urged aid providers—including the US government—to act impartially after a disaster, investing money and effort to commensurate with the levels of need.
As climate-related disasters increase, aid must be more focused on preparing communities, working with local NGOs and governments to create relief that works in the long-term, and helping make vulnerable communities stronger in the face of climate change.
"Communities around the world have the knowledge and experience to craft their response to the negative impacts of climate change, but they need adequate funding to make it happen," said Offenheiser. "Investing in community resilience, especially for the most vulnerable, must be a cornerstone of any American effort on climate change."
The report is released right as important climate change legislation is moving through the Energy and Commerce Committee of the House of Representatives and as the White House prepares to host a high-level meeting of developed countries in Washington on climate change.
"Now is the time for bold action on climate," said Offenheiser. "We must not only improve our response to disasters, but also fund measures that help communities adapt to climate change. After all, it is poverty and failure to recognize everyone’s right to survive that turn a storm into a disaster."
]]>
UPDATE: April 2011
This note is to briefly explain why Oxfam has revised its view of its 2009 forecast of a likely rise in the number of people affected by climate-related disasters.
Two years ago Oxfam did an analysis of the number of people affected by past climate-related events. From this analysis we made a forecast that by 2015 it was likely that the average annual number of people affected by climate-related disasters would be 375 million and this represented an increase of 54 per cent compared with the average figure of the decade 1998-2007.
Having reviewed the data and the method we used to analyse the data we are no longer confident in the specific approach we used, given the nature of the data, as described below, and so we are no longer confident of this specific forecast.
Our concerns are essentially two-fold: the limitations of the data and the limitations of the way we analysed the data.
The limitations of the data: The data we used was from EM-DAT, the international disaster database managed by CRED, the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. This is a respected set of data which captures, amongst other things, the number of disasters that has happened and the number of people affected.
Like most sets of data it has its limitations. In EM-DAT’s case one of the key limitations is that the more recent data is more reliable. This was well known to us and we dealt with this in our analysis by using double exponential smoothing on the data (see the explanation of how we carried out the analysis and catered for the data’s limitation).
However one limitation we did not know at the time and have only recently discovered is that the number of people affected by climate-related disasters in China is unusually low in first half of the 1980s when compared with subsequent years. It is highly likely that this is the result of under reporting from China. Given the size of China’s population its disaster figures are significant when considering the global picture. The likely impact of this on our forecast may mean that we started our analysis with data from 1980 that was likely to be unreasonably low and therefore made our projected increase in the number of people affected artificially high.
We now know that there has been a significant increase in reporting from many other countries over the same period due to better information and communication.
Limitations of our analysis: Though we were clear in our explanation of the way we came to our conclusion that “different forecasting models could lead to different results,” what we should have done, particularly given the high volatility of the data especially in 2002, was run these different models to help determine the degree of confidence in the conclusion we came to.
It does not mean though that there will not be an increase in the numbers of people affected by disasters in the future. There is evidence to point to this likelihood.
According to EM-DAT the number of climate-related disasters has increased by 35 per cent from the 1990s to the 2000s. Floods have increased by 50 per cent over the same period. Munich Re’s database of global disasters also shows an increasing trend in climate-related events. It is not possible to know how much of this is an increase in events or better reporting of events and neither can we assume that an increase in events will lead to an equal increase in numbers affected.
Population growth means that there is a likelihood of more people being affected by climate-related events.
The number of people exposed to some climate-related events is also on the increase. According to the forthcoming United Nations Global Assessment Report 2011 the number of people exposed to floods and cyclones has doubled between 1970 and 2010. It is likely that many people who are ‘exposed’ to hazards are not affected due to measures that protect them, such as flood defences for example. However in many vulnerable countries investment and efforts to reduce significantly the risk of disasters is sorely lacking leaving millions exposed and likely to be affected by disasters.
Finally as the effects of climate change become more apparent there are more frequent and more intense climate-related events according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fourth Assessment Report.
Oxfam is in the process of further research into the number of people affected by climate-related events and will be publishing the results of this research in due course.
]]>
Urgent action is required to make the bailout work for poor countries, complete the crackdown on tax havens and speed up reform of the IMF and World Bank, Oxfam said as it published its initial analysis of the London Summit, What Happened at the G-20?
The analysis also raises question over how much of the $50 billion promised for poor countries will be new money. Money distributed through the Multilateral Development Banks, in particular, could come from existing aid budgets.
Oxfam's recommended next steps towards for a 'new world order' are:
"The G-20 could mark an historic turning point but we have been here too many times in the past to take rich countries' promises at face value," said Duncan Green, Oxfam spokesperson. "World leaders need to take decisive steps to turn their rhetoric about a new world order into reality.
"That means an end to the damaging conditionality imposed on poor countries when they ask for assistance from the IMF. If the price of a bailout is to close health clinics and schools then the financial medicine offered by the G-20 will make the patient worse, not better.
"And it means real action to tackle climate change. It would be a tragedy if having benefited from an economic bailout, the world economy and the millions of poor people at greatest risk, quickly become the victims of climate change."
]]>Against this backdrop, how did the G20 leaders perform?
]]>This brief looks at how current laws undermine US foreign aid as a strategic tool for fighting poverty today. Drawing from original legal analysis, it argues that foreign aid legislation:
Oxfam America is calling for ambitious reforms to US foreign assistance—from aid's legislation, strategy, organizational structure, and implementation, to a substantive rethink of development in the field. Our foreign aid should lead global development efforts, it should put developing states and their citizens in the driver’s seat, and it should strive to get as much value as possible for poor people out of every aid dollar.
]]>Oxfam says G-20 leaders could make a critical difference to the world's poorest people by diverting a tiny fraction of the bailout money to provide an economic stimulus, social safety nets and health services for those affected by the economic crisis.
Oxfam is calling for a $580 billion-a-year rescue package for poor countries made up of an immediate fiscal stimulus for the poorest countries of at least $24 billion, debt relief and fulfillment of existing pledges to increase development aid.
Urgent action is also needed to crackdown on tax havens, which deprive developing countries of hundreds of millions of dollars of tax revenue every year—much more than they receive in development aid.
"When you look at the amount of money that has been found for banks it seems inconceivable that G-20 leaders will stand aside and allow the economic crisis to destroy poor people' lives," said Raymond C. Offenheiser, president of Oxfam America.
"Developing countries are reeling from dramatic declines in trade, remittances and foreign investment. Rich governments whose policies contributed to the crisis have a responsibility to help those who cannot afford their own bailouts.
"Without urgent action, hundreds of millions of the world's poorest people will fall further into poverty. Losing your job is devastating wherever it happens but for millions people in poor countries, without benefits and health services to fall back on, unemployment will push them into destitution."
An Oxfam report, published earlier this week, revealed women are hit hardest and are often the first to lose their jobs as countries slide into recession. For many, in developing countries the recession comes on top of high fuel and food prices that have already stretched communities to breaking point.
Oxfam is pressing for rich country governments to promote a 'green new deal' by ensuring their domestic rescue packages help tackle climate change by accelerating the transition to a low-carbon economy.
Oxfam is also calling for reform of international financial institutions, including the IMF and World Bank, to give developing countries a real say in the decisions that affect them.
"We cannot return to the situation where the greed of the richest was allowed to take precedence over the needs of millions," said Offenheiser. "G-20 leaders have a real opportunity to take a significant step towards a fairer, more sustainable world."
]]>Global aid levels—published today by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in London—are also minimal in comparison to the $8.4 trillion mobilized to bailout ailing banks, Oxfam said. At $173 billion, the American Insurance Group (AIG) alone has received $50 billion more than total global aid levels.
"Despite this welcome increase, aid levels remain tiny compared to the economies of rich countries—just 0.3 percent," said Max Lawson, head of development finance for Oxfam. "That is the same as it was in 1993. They have found 70 times more, $8.4 trillion, to save banks. Aid is an absolutely vital lifeline for the poorest people, especially in these brutal economic times. Far more is needed, and needed now."
"While aid alone is not enough for the poorest countries to escape the poverty trap—quality, long-term aid does make a huge difference. Poor country governments have used aid to scale up spending on education and health to help fight poverty," said Lawson. "The Tanzanian government used its aid income to offer free schooling to its primary-aged children—and now 3.5 million more children are now in school. Tanzania also used aid to strengthen its health services, helping to reduce the number of children dying in their first year of life by almost a third."
"Rich countries can come up with the money when they want to. AIG's executive bonuses alone could have paid for enough teachers for 7 million children in Africa. We need to see the G-20 move fast in London this week to rescue babies not just bankers," Lawson said.
Foreign direct investment into developing countries has collapsed by more than $700 billion since 2007—more than six times total aid levels. Remittances are also falling rapidly as unemployment rises in the rich world. Global trade has ground to a virtual halt. Aid is needed now more than ever to help the poorest countries weather the economic tsunami.
The OECD's figures show that aid has increased by 10 percent in real terms in 2008 to $120 billion. However, Sub-Saharan Africa—despite being the poorest region on earth—only saw a tiny increase of just 0.4 percent to $22.5 billion.
Most rich nations still have a mountain to climb to meet their 2005 promises to increase global aid by $50 billion by 2010, with half of this going to Africa. Italy, the G8 chair in 2009, is the worst offender. The OECD calculates that Italy will need to increase its aid spending by 145 percent to meet its promise. The shortfalls must be acknowledged and a clear timetable set to increase aid to meet pledges.
]]>"President Obama has said that promoting development is an essential part of the strategy for Afghanistan. But our development tools need major reform if we want them to deliver results," said Raymond C. Offenheiser, president of Oxfam America.
"Our foreign aid must focus on poverty reduction and empowering Afghans to lead their own development, which is the surest way of meeting Afghan needs," said Offenheiser. "The Obama Administration has an important opportunity to enhance the effectiveness of US aid to Afghanistan—and other countries—by creating a US national strategy to support global development.
"The strategy must have clear objectives for all US foreign aid: focus on fighting poverty, streamline and coordinate all sources of US funding, and give recipients the lead in determining the needs of their communities."
The Oxfam report, Smart Development In Practice—Field Report from Afghanistan, is based on a series of interviews in Kabul with individuals involved in the delivery of US aid, including employees of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), other foreign donor contractors, consulting companies, Afghan and international nongovernmental organizations, as well as Afghan government officials.
According to interviewees, there has been limited success in part because the US uses foreign aid to achieve short-term or security objectives. The report also identifies insufficient US support for long-term capacity building and an excessive volume of funds absorbed by private contractors. Agriculture and rural trade sectors, which are critical to the daily lives of Afghans, have not received the focus and resources they require.
However, the report also highlights success stories, where development initiatives have had clear development objectives and a high level of local ownership. One example is the Afghanistan community midwifery program, started in 2002 by the government of Afghanistan, which USAID is funding.
The program, trains women as midwives to improve chances of both mother and child surviving childbirth, and has begun to reduce some of world's highest maternal and neonatal mortality rates. With the help of the program, the number of facilities with skilled female health workers increased from 39 percent in 2004 to 76 percent in 2006.
The real success of the program can be seen in the active participation of individuals and communities: there were huge number of female volunteers for the program, often supported by their fathers and husbands; and women who are trained by this program can go on to earn good salaries in health clinics around the country.
"Programs like this show how critical local ownership and engagement are to the success of foreign aid projects. If we work closely with Afghans, and ultimately give them more control over their own development initiatives, we dramatically improve the chances of achieving positive change," said Offenheiser.
]]>"Oxfam welcomes the G20 Finance Ministers' commitment to help emerging and developing economies cope with this crisis, which was not of their making. But we are disappointed that the G20 finance ministers did not commit to an immediate rescue package for low-income countries of at least $24bn. Poor people need help now.
"A significant share of the new resources for the World Bank and the IMF must be reserved for the world's poorest countries and funding must come without harmful conditions.
"As we speak, some rich G20 countries have cut their development aid budgets, it is vitally important that leaders of rich countries get back on-track with their aid commitments at the April Summit."
"The recognition that emerging and developing economies, including the poorest, should have greater voice and representation within international financial institutions is both welcome and long overdue—as is the decision that the Head of the World Bank and the IMF should be appointed on merit.
"Now G20 leaders must guarantee equality between developed and emerging and developing countries within these institutions at the April Summit. It is time these institutions were made fit for purpose for the 21st century."
"Finance ministers have failed to agree the coordinated global action that is needed to solve the problem of tax havens. Tax havens currently cost poor countries up to $120 billion a year in lost tax on individuals' incomes and many billions more as a result of tax evasion by companies. This money could and should be used to help people out of poverty.
"If world leaders are serious about cracking down on tax havens they must commit to a multilateral agreement which all countries can sign on to and insist on automatic exchange of information between tax authorities. These steps are vital to enable developing countries to collect the money they are due."
"The commitment to fight all forms of protectionism is welcome. But it is vital that trade is regulated in a way that allows it to be used to help poor countries develop as promised at the World Trade Organization in 2001."
]]>