Access International Development Training Programme - MODULE 2

Access International Development Training Programme MODULE 2 Access International Development and Globalisation: key themes and ideas that inform development practice

www.aidproject.eu

Module 2 - EN.indd 1

3/22/13 1:03 PM

Table of contents Module 2 • Access International Development & Globalisation: Key Themes and Ideas that inform Development Practice • Rationale for the Module • Aims • Content Unit 1: Introduction to Key Themes & Ideas • Aims • Learning Outcomes • The Roots of International Development • Map of the World Outlining the Global North and the Global South • ‘The Third World’ • How we Describe Development • Describing Development • Changing and Varied Meanings But… • Measuring Development • From GNP/GDP to HDI • HDI – The Human Development Index • HDI Indices • Development in the HDI • HDI – UNDP Human Development Reports • Concluding Remarks Unit 2: The Architecture of Aid • Aims • Learning Outcomes • Official Develoment Assistance • Poverty & Inequality • The Architecture of Aid Flows • Who are the main players now?

• What is Aid Effectiveness?

• The Paris Declaration & VFM • Concluding Remarks

Page 3

Page 3 – 6

Page 6 -9

Unit 3: The International Political Economy of Development and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) • Aims • Learning Outcomes • The Political Economy of Development • The Millennium Development Goals • Getting the MDGs on Track?

• Key Debates around the MDGs • What Has or Hasn’t been Achieved?

• Post 2015 – More of the Same?

• Concluding Remarks Unit 4: Conflict and Development • Aims • Learning Outcomes • Are War and Conflict the Same Thing?

• Case Study Part 1: Defining War & Conflict

- The Nature of Conflicts in Africa • Case Study Part 2: Factors Shaping Conflict and Development in Africa

- Modernisation, democratisation and colonisation

- Economic

- Militarisation

- Ethnicity

- Population

- Volatile climate and environmentalism

- Political Corruption • Case Study Part 3: The Cost of Conflict in Africa

- Consequences of Conflicts

- Human Security and Addressing Conflict and Development • Concluding Remarks

Page 10 - 13

Page 13 - 18

Unit 5: An Introduction to Gender Awareness, Human Rights & Human Security • Aims • Learning Outcomes

Page 19

Unit 6: An Introduction to Sustainable Development and Climate Justice • Aims • Learning Outcomes

Page 19

Page 2

Module 2 - EN.indd 2

3/22/13 1:03 PM

Module 2

• An Introduction to Sustainable Development and Climate Justice Please note that a number of the links provided in this training manual are available in English only. Where possible, resources available in other languages have been identified as well.

Access International Development and Globalisation: Unit 1: Introduction to key themes and ideas that Key Themes and Ideas inform development practice Aims

Rationale for the Module Sustainable international development and globalisation are inextricably linked and encompass a wide range of complex, interrelated and competing issues to be examined. This module is designed as an introduction to many of these issues and has been developed to encourage students to think in an integrated fashion, to understand the complex linkages between humans in the minority and majority worlds (Global North and Global South) and the natural environment, and to develop an awareness of pressing development issues and the challenges faced by those seeking to work in international development contexts.

Aims

1. T o examine how we describe the places where international development happens and what development is.

2. T o examine how we measure international development at the macro level.

Learning Outcomes On completion of this week’s content you should be able to identify: 1. S ome of the ways in which we describe international development and what these descriptions say about our understanding of the world.

2. T he importance of how we measure international development and how this has changed over time.

The Roots of International Development

This module aims to develop students’ understanding of the complexity of international development and globalisation and the interrelationship between the minority and majority worlds. Through the structured assessment, students will be encouraged to be critical and reflective in their learning and to present their ideas and arguments in logical and coherent ways.

Content This module is designed to introduce you to some of the major actors and theories that currently drive the international development agenda. The module content will address the following: • What is international development? How do we describe it and measure it?

• The Architecture of International Aid - financing, harmonisation, effectiveness and advocacy - key actors in the field. How do we understand the concepts of poverty, inequality and globalisation as they relate to international development theory and practice? What are some of the ethical dimensions of ‘doing development’?

• The Political Economy of International Development and the Millennium Development Goals - what they are and what is likely to replace them after 2015?

• Conflict and Development - tensions and relationships • An introduction to the Tools for Development • An Introduction to Gender Awareness, Human Rights and Human Security

It is virtually impossible to understand international development as it is described and done today, without first examining its roots in the colonial period of empires and the subsequent decolonisation process that began after WWII. Each country in the Global South has a rich historical narrative that tracks the evolution of its relationship with its former colonising country, be it in the Asia-Pacific, Latin America or Sub-Saharan Africa.

The term that was commonly used for the Global South was the ‘Third World’. You will still find it referred to in the literature about development although it is less commonly used than it used to be.

On the map in the link provided below you will be able to see the countries we are referring to when we talk about the Global South or the ‘Third World’. The map also lists other names that we use to describe more than two-thirds of the world’s countries.

Page 3

Module 2 - EN.indd 3

3/22/13 1:03 PM

Map of the World outlining the Global North and Global South

War players.

This map shows us clearly those countries that are considered to be developed and those that are considered to be developing.

‘The Third World’ The term the ‘Third World’ was coined in the 1950s by French demographer and economic historian, Alfred Sauvy, in an article he wrote entitled: ‘One Planet, Three Worlds’. What he was describing was the geo-politics of the world at the time.

This consisted of the “First World” made up of the Western capitalist states and led by the USA, the “Second World” which was made up of the communist block countries of Eastern Europe and led by the USSR and the Third World, which referred to the newly independent states (or those on the path to independence). These countries described as belonging to the “Third World” had the common experience of colonisation and subsequent decolonisation in the post World War 2 period with all the difficulties that this presented and which were more than anything else, bound together by the fact that they were non-aligned to either of the two major power blocs that existed in the world during the post WWII Cold War period.

The non-aligned movement was formally expressed in the form of the 1955 Bandung Conference, which was expressly pan Afro-Asian in its conception and gathered together about 30 states of varying political, regional and ideological character. The establishment of this non-aligned movement was an attempt by newly independent states to carve out a niche for themselves in the world order of the time and thereby to determine their own collective destinies if you like – separate from those dictated by the constraints of the ideological struggle that was going on between the key Cold *Alfred Sauvy – article ‘One Planet, Three Worlds’

Module 2 - EN.indd 4

So the term the ‘Third World’ is wedded to the Cold War context that existed up until the demise of the Soviet Union in the 1990s and the break up of the Eastern bloc. Many therefore argue that it is no longer a relevant or useful concept. The academic VS Naipaul describes the term (and I paraphrase) ‘as a bloodless universality that suppresses a wealth of diversity and voices that exist in the nations that it seeks to describe’ while others argue that the term is still useful because it is linked to decolonisation and the subsequent processes of neo-colonialism in the form of the uneven economic playing field that was created by historical legacies and still exists in the form of the international economic order which relegates developing countries to a peripheral or marginal place in that economic order.

KEY POINTS • It was a political/ideological term, not an economic one • Constituted roughly 2/3 of the world’s countries at the time • Many “Third World” countries became members of the nonaligned movement after the 1955 Bandung Conference • The “Third World” was the site of ideological battle for influence between the First and Second Worlds in their competition for geo-political influence Thinking/Discussion Point: Think about other ways to describe the places where International Development happens. Note down which term you prefer to describe where international development happens and why.

How We Describe Development Be aware when you are using terminology about international development that: • There are many terms and that have different meanings to Page 4

3/22/13 1:03 PM

people • These meanings can and do shift over time too – just think about the term the “Third World” that went from being pervasive in the literature about development, to what now seems like quite an antiquated term • Naming and defining is an expressly political act that reveals perspective and bias – be aware of this in your readings and in the language you choose to use

emergencies and to alleviate associated human suffering.

Describing Development?

“Not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted.” Albert Einstein

It won’t surprise you that there is no single working definition of what international development is. There are a variety of interpretations and all of these are premised on ideas about how the world should be.

From GNP/GDP to HDI

Have a look at this list and think about what each of these terms used to describe the development process means to you and which of them you like the most: • Progress • Order out of messiness • Civilisation • Economic Growth • Raising living standards • Modernisation • Improving welfare • Poverty Reduction • Expanded Choices • Freedom • Human Security

By contrast, international development work consists of longer term programmes of work and engagement designed to bring about positive economic and social change in the contexts where all other conditions are ‘normalised’.

Measuring Development

Purely economic measures of development were used until the early 1990s at the international level to measure development outcomes across the world.

GDP (gross domestic product) is a measure of wealth. The GDP of a country is defined as the market value of all final goods and services produced within a country in a given period of time.

Another similar measure used was GNP (gross national product). It is GDP (Gross Domestic Product, the value of goods and services produced within a country) plus net income received by residents from non-resident sources.

Thinking/Discussion Point: Why do you think GDP or GNP were used as the primary measurements of development for so long?

Thinking/Discussion Point: Note down your thoughts on the descriptors of development, which one/s you liked best and why.

Changing and Varied Meanings But...

As stated previously, there is no overarching consensus on how we define or understand development. There are a few things to remember when examining ideas about development though: 1. D evelopment carries with it values and attitudes shaped by historical events and older meanings so there is a lineage of ideas to be explored in each case study context that you examine; 2. It carries its colonial origins; 3. Ultimately, it is premised on the notion that we know how to bring about positive social change in very diverse contexts and this is an assumption that needs to be questioned often when we look at the balance sheet of human development and consider the efforts made to ‘improve’ things around the world.

While there is no consensus on a single internationally recognised definition of international development, there is broad agreement on the fact that there is a difference between international development and humanitarian assistance.

Humanitarian assistance is designed to be a rapid response to the worst effects of either natural disasters or complex humanitarian

HDI - The Human Development Index In answering the previous question posed, the thinking behind basing judgments about development on solely economic grounds was that if there was enough money for development then other things that societies value, like health and education, would be able to be funded and so other development outcomes would inevitably follow. However, the chequered history of development in the latter half of the twentieth century, tells us that this is too simplistic an approach.

The Human Development Index was created in the 1990s and it has literally revolutionised the way in which development is now measured globally.

The HDI links the human lived experience and what we value most to measurements of development.

An annual report of the HDI is produced every year by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

It began in the early 1990s and uses statistical benchmarking based on composite indices.

HDI Indices In order to understand the approach of the Human Development Index as captured in the UNDP Annual Reports

Page 5

Module 2 - EN.indd 5

3/22/13 1:03 PM

you need to understand that from its inception it focused on gathering data from every country in the world on the following things: • A long and healthy life – life expectancy at birth • Access to knowledge – literacy rates • A decent standard of living – GDP/capita (PPP US$) • PPP = purchase power parity to take account of the different cost of things in different countries • GDP/capita tells us how much there is to go around everyone

Unit 2: The Architecture of Aid Aims The aims for this week are: 1. To explore how aid operates, 2. To explore who the key actors are; 3. To examine what aid is trying to achieve.

Learning Outcomes

Development in the HDI Over the past twenty years, the Human Development Index has become more sophisticated in the data it seeks to gather.

It started with the basics - life expectancy, literacy and GDP/ capita - but has since moved on to gather and publish data on the following: • There is now a Gender Development Index (GDI) that examines the development differential between men and women in each country The Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) looks at political participation and decision-making; economic participation and decision-making and power over economic resources.

• The HPI-I is the Human Poverty Index for developing countries. The HPI-II is the Human Poverty Index for selected OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries which recognises that countries may be well off but this does not mean that poverty doesn’t exist within them.

• The latest innovation is the relatively new Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI), first published in 2010, which drills rights down to the household level to gather data about poverty in countries. The MPI has replaced the Human Poverty Index in the current Human Development Reports.

HDI - UNDP Human Development Reports Please see this link for more information about the Human Development Index and for access to the latest Human Development Reports. http://hdr.undp.org/en/nhdr/ These reports are available in a number of languages so look on the website for the report you are interested in and follow the link at the bottom of the page to your preferred language of delivery: http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/

Concluding Remarks We have explored how we describe and measure development at the macro level. Next week we will move on to look at how we do development by examining the architecture of international aid.

On successful completion of this week you should: 1. B e capable of identifying the key institutions and organisations involved in financing international development; 2. Understand the intended use for development aid finance; 3. Be aware of the challenges facing the current aid architecture; 4. Understand how aid financing relates poverty and inequality.

The architecture of international aid refers to the structures and institutions that exist for supplying development assistance (or raising the finances needed). Whether or not this architecture is ‘fit for purpose’ – has become a growing concern for aid donors and is now a hotly debated issue within international development. The Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (http://www.oecd.org/development/ aideffectiveness/34428351.pdf) was issued at the Paris High Level Forum in 2005 with a commitment to continuing and increasing efforts in harmonization, alignment, managing for results, and mutual accountability. It listed a set of actions and indicators that can monitored to accelerate progress in these areas because it was believed they would increase the impact aid has in reducing poverty and inequality, increasing growth, building capacity and accelerating achievement of the MDGs. By 2011 only 1 of the 12 indicators set in 2005 had been met and the Buscan High Level meeting in December 2011, concluded the principles are too process oriented, technical and not focused on poverty reduction (http://www. cfr.org/south-korea/busan-high-level-forum-dead-aid-betterdevelopment/p26790) and new institutions need to be put in place. In light of this, we turn this week to where the money comes from, who it goes to and why, how it gets from one to the other and whether it is achieving what it is meant to achieve.

Official Development Assistance Development aid is now a catch phrase for many types of aid.

Common terms are: international aid, foreign aid, overseas aid and development assistance. This is financial aid given by governments or agencies to developing countries to support the economic, environmental, social and political development of developing countries. Historically development aid has focused on addressing poverty (unlike humanitarian aid which addresses the immediate needs of people following a crisis, by providing food, water, sanitation, shelter and healthcare to those affected).

In this unit we are referring primarily to Official Development

Page 6

Module 2 - EN.indd 6

3/22/13 1:03 PM

Assistance (ODA) which is the transfer of public funds either directly from one government to another (bi-lateral aid), or given by one country to a multilateral agency such as the United Nations agencies and World Bank, which then distributes it through a recipient country (multi-lateral aid) or through Nongovernmental Organisations, for the purpose of stabilising a country’s growth over the long run. ODA is given to developing countries and is focused on addressing poverty. Assistance for more advanced countries and territories in transition, including many former Soviet republics, is called official aid and not counted as ODA.

development agencies and their efforts to advocate for more aid are counted as ‘aid’, as is concession flows on ‘debt forgiveness’ which is really a flow from one branch of government in a rich country to the same country’s Treasury. Some commentators argue that ‘real aid’ is calculated by subtracting items such as debt cancellation and the costs related to developing country refugees and students arriving in donor countries from reported ODA .

Thinking/Discussion Point: Think about the types of ways the governments and agencies of the Global North might ‘help’ the global south reduce poverty and support economic growth.

Given the above definition of ODA, what categories of assistance do you think might be included/excluded as ODA? Aid covers a complicated set of transfers, not all of which go directly to poor countries. For example, the admin overheads of

By these estimates 13% of aid in 2008 came from nonDevelopment Assistance Committee (DAC) official donors, 23.6% from NGOs and only 63.4% was ‘real’ DAC assistance (80:20, Development in An Unequal World, 6th Edition, 2011). The DAC is a group of countries within the OECD who are committed to providing ODA to improve development outcomes. For more information see: http://www.oecd.org/dac/

Look at these facts about aid in the mid-2000s Countries ranked by the amount of ODA received in 2006 ($ million) excluding debt relief. (Source: OECD)

Countries ranked according to ODA received as a percentage of gross domestic product. (Source: UNDP figures for 2005)

Countries ranked according to the amount of ODA given. Amount ($ million) Proportion of gross national income (%).

The United Nations has long set a target of 0.7 percent of gross national income for aid. (Source: OECD, 2006)

Biggest Receivers of ODA

Most Dependent on ODA

The Biggest Givers of ODA

1. Iraq 5,143 2. Afghanistan 2,405 3. Sudan 1,518 4. Vietnam 1,289 5. China 1,174 6. Pakistan 1,140 7. Ethiopia 996 8. Tanzania 988 9. Uganda 934 10. Colombia 917

1. Solomon Islands 66.5 2. East Timor 52.9 3. Burundi 45.6 4. Sao Tome 45.2 5. Eritrea 36.6 6. Sierra Leone 28.8 7. Congo Republic 28.5 8. Malawi 27.8 9. Palestinian Territories 27.4 10. Rwanda 26.7

1. United States 21,753 0.16 2. Germany 12,267 0.37 3. France 9,940 0.39 4. Britain 9,921 0.36 5. Japan 7,691 0.17 6. Netherlands 6,215 0.81 7. Spain 5,744 0.41 8. Sweden 4,334 0.93 9. Italy 3,929 0.19 10. Canada 3,922 0.28

Poverty and Inequality The Development Assistance Committee (DAC) is a key policy forum where the major bilateral donors work together to foster effective, co-ordinated and adequately financed support for sustainable development and poverty reduction. At the DAC’s annual High Level Meeting ministers and senior aid officials discuss leading issues and endorse policy guidance that has been developed by members. In coming weeks we will look more closely at sustainable development and poverty reduction.

DAC members have reached a common consensus that views poverty as: ‘Poverty encompasses different dimensions of deprivation *80:20 Development in an Unequal World 6th Edition, 2011

Module 2 - EN.indd 7

that relate to human capabilities including consumption and food security, health, education, rights, voice, security, dignity and decent work. Poverty must be reduced in the context of environmental sustainability. Reducing gender inequality is key to all dimensions of poverty.’ (http://www.oecd.org/dac/ povertyreduction/1849018.pdf: page 4) They also share a broad understanding that, ‘Reducing poverty calls for rapid and sustainable pro-poor growth. This requires good governance, prudent macroeconomic management, competitive markets and a vibrant private sector, efficient institutions and sustainable use of natural resources. Making growth pro-poor requires equitable participation by poor men and women in generating and benefiting from growth. It also requires reforms to reduce inequalities regarding human capabilities and access to assets and productive resources

Page 7

3/22/13 1:03 PM

Who are the main players now?

such as land, training and credit.’ (http://www.oecd.org/dac/ povertyreduction/1849018.pdf: page 4) When the Millennium Development Goals were adopted at the beginning of the Millennium, DAC members accepted them as the set of quantitative and qualitative goals for monitoring progress towards the ‘ultimate objective’ of poverty eradication. This meant ODA was also being directed towards addressing poverty and inequality and the long standing aim of donating 0.7% of Gross National Income to development aid.

Yet only 5 countries have reached or exceeded this UN target.

The Architecture of Aid Flows Look at the diagrams below, they indicate what the aid architecture looked like in 2007. This is a very different picture to what would have been representative in say, 1970 or 1980.

Bi-lateral donors. Member States of the United Nations that provide development assistance directly to recipient countries.

In 2012 there are 24 members of DAC -Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, European Union, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, new Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK, and USA. Some of these are more recent members and there are also significant non-DAC bi-laterals such as China, Brazil, Turkey, and Thailand who now donate substantial sums of ODA but are not well represented on policy forums. The ‘major’ donors – members of the G8 and G20 along with the UN system, the OECD, the IMF and World bank, set international aid policy.

Multilateral agencies & Global Partnerships: There are more than 200 multilateral agencies including the United Nations, the World Bank and the Global Funds. This latter type of funding channel has proliferated in recent years to plug specific gaps in the international system or to mobilize finance for a specific issue. For example, there are over 100 global partnerships in health alone.

Private Aid Organisations (primarily NGOs but also Foundations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates organisation, religious organisations and voluntary organisations): The number of NGOs is difficult to state with any accuracy but there are estimated to be between 6,000 & 33,000 NGOs in the Global South.

Source: Kharas, H (2007) Trends and Issues in Development Aid, Wolfensohn Centre for Development, Working Paper 1, November 2007

It is also worth noting that national advocacy campaigns such as the UK’s Jubilee 2000 have successfully advocated for debt reduction for the developing countries.

How much is ‘donated’ in ODA and other development aid?

You can view development aid flows visually here: http://www. aidflows.org/ and examine 2007 aid givers and receivers from another perspective using this interactive guide, here: http:// www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/datablog/2010/ sep/15/aid-spending-received-statistics Thinking/Discussion Point: Do statistics showing more aid or less poverty really tell us aid is working and that we have more ‘development’?

What is Aid Effectiveness?

Source: Kharas, H (2007) Trends and Issues in Development Aid, Wolfensohn Centre for Development, Working Paper 1, November 2007 Thinking/Discussion point: Compare the two diagrams of the Architecture of Aid Flows and compare the key players and the key givers and receivers, suppliers and deliverers in each. Who are they and what has really changed?

In the words of the 4th High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, ‘Aid effectiveness is about ensuring maximum impact of development aid to improve lives, cut poverty and help achieve the Millennium Development Goals’ (http://www. aideffectiveness.org/busanhlf4/en/topics/aid-effectiveness. html) The Global North struggled with financial crisis emerging from the mid-2000s, commitments to deliver ODA (of $130 billion by 2010) looked less and less likely. Debt relief of the early 2000s had inflated aid donation figures (writing off debt but making

Page 8

Module 2 - EN.indd 8

3/22/13 1:03 PM

no cash transfers and counting it in the aid finance figures) but all indications were (and are) that ODA will slip. One answer has been to better manage aid or make aid more effective – a more ‘bang for the buck’ kind of thinking.

This took shape at policy level through the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness. The rationale was that for development assistance to have the maximum impact it should be transparent, predictable and delivered in partnership with recipient countries.

In effect donors, receiving countries and the agencies and organisations delivering signed up for the following key principles with agreement they monitor their progress in improving the quality of aid provided against specific indicators, most of which had targets to 2010: • Ownership: developing countries set their own priorities for development, strengthen their institutions and lead in coordinating aid.

• Alignment: donors line up their aid behind developing country priorities and make better use of a country’s plans, policies and systems.

• Harmonisation: donors coordinate to avoid duplication, simplify procedures and agree a better division of labour with partner countries.

• Managing for results: developing countries and donors keep their focus on producing - and measuring - results.

• Mutual accountability: donors and developing countries are held accountable for the results they achieve to each other, and to their parliaments and public

The Paris Declaration and VFM In practice what happened with this policy, as a major ministerial conference in Ghana in 2005 heard, was that in a survey of 54 developing countries accounting for about half of all aid receipts, less than 25 percent of aid recipient countries had actionable development strategies. Less than 10 percent had sound frameworks to monitor results. Less than half of aid was being reported in recipient country budgets. At the same time, donors insisted on using their own fiduciary systems - even where recipient country had good quality systems. Amazingly, donors now felt the need to undertaken ever more field missions to the 54 recipient countries – between 2005 and 2008, 14,000 missions at a substantial cost; and for example, they fielded over 1,000 missions to Vietnam in a single year or 3 per day.(Kharas & Linn, 2008).

With the Paris Declaration, the concept of Value for Money (VFM), prevalent in UK and EU public sectors, moved on to the development agenda. Unfortunately, in its application it has caused untold tension between donors and development practitioners in particular. In May 2012, the confusion and tension was enough to cause the OECD to issue a 4 page document explaining VFM in development. Accessed at http:// www.oecd.org/dac/aideffectiveness/49652541.pdf The Paris Declaration excludes more than half of all aid that actually reaches countries—the private foundations, NGOs

and humanitarian groups who give almost $60 billion to the poorest countries and non-DAC official donors like China, India and some of the oil-rich countries. Development practitioners in NGOs, foundations and other private donors, however, have not been immune from the policies, approaches and tools prevalent among the major donors of the DAC. The pursuit of accountability, transparency, and better quality development programmes among the larger international NGOs and those implementing on behalf of bi-lateral and multi-lateral donors have been integrated into tools of Program Cycle Management (http://www.bond.org.uk/pages/value-for-money.html) – and an increasing burden for their partners and beneficiaries.

Tools for Development will look more closely at Program Cycle Management.

Thinking/Discussion Point: “Above all else development is a question of values, human attitudes and preferences, selfdefined goals, and criteria for determining what are tolerable costs to be borne in the course of change. These are far more important than optimal resource allocations, upgraded skills, or the rationalization of administrative procedures” (Goulet, 1996) What do you think the ethical considerations are for development in making ‘effectiveness’ a key criteria for ODA? You might think about this in terms of duties, justice, rights, universality/human family or religion.

Concluding Remarks The ODI Briefing Paper ahead of the 4th High Level Forum which met to discuss progress on the implementation of the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (accessed here: http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/docs/7299.pdf) notes important changes in the global landscape and different perspectives on development since the 2005 Paris Declaration was signed. These are identified as; shifts in global wealth and influence, changed development needs, links between aid volume and aid quality, non-DAC flows and non-aid finance as well as post-crisis aid policies in traditional donor countries.

In their analysis (and that of others) the developing countries have lived up to their side of the Paris Declaration than has the aid donors of the Global North. By its own monitoring system, sufficient progress on better managing aid to ensure better quality development has not been met and the Aid Effectiveness agenda has lost political potency and visibility.

What seems to have actually happened at Buscan is that traditional donors, especially the European Commission, favoured bolstering the Paris Principles whereas emerging donors such as China, Brazil, Russia, and India contended that traditional donor standards should not apply to them.

They wanted existing international agreements regulating north-south cooperation dealt with separately from those that govern south-south co-operation. The Global South also pushed for the untying of all aid by 2013 and making their country systems (e.g., public finance management and local procurement) the default option for aid implementation.

Civil society groups insisted that the Rights Based Approach should be included in any principles coming out of the meeting. South Korea, the host nation, sought advocated a

Page 9

Module 2 - EN.indd 9

3/22/13 1:03 PM

new global consensus around ‘development effectiveness’ rather than ‘aid effectiveness’ which would encompass effective institutions, gender equality and empowerment for development results, the active involvement of emerging donors and the private sector in development cooperation, and a monitoring framework set with UN collaboration.. The final outcome document (the BOD), while failing to deliver a binding agreement seems to have shifted the discourse on aid effectiveness towards a new development cooperation framework that includes the newer bi-lateral donors and private actors (http://www.cfr.org/south-korea/busan-highlevel-forum-dead-aid-better-development/p26790) Thinking/Discussion points: Should international aid policy be set by one organisation/agency, and if so which one and why? If you were setting up a system to measure the impact of development aid, what would you insist should be included/ excluded?

Unit 3 The International Political Economy of Development and the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)

Declaration (2000) at the beginning of this century. These eight goals, each with a specific set of targets to achieve them, have the overarching aim of halving world poverty by 2015.

Thrashed out by the UN, the OECD’s DAC (the subject of last week’s lecture), the World Bank and IMF, the commentator Hulme (2009) calls the MDGs the ‘world’s biggest promise’ and describes them as ultimately a result of the ‘chaos of accidents and purposes’ (Hulme 2009:1). In December 2010, the UN held a World Summit on the MDGs to look at progress towards the 2015 targets. Although some progress had been made, most of the targets are unlikely to be met. As Oxfam put it at the time, ‘progress is slow and many hard won achievements have been undone after the global food, fuel and economic crisis’ and unless rescued, ‘we are likely to face the greatest collective failure of history’ (Oxfam, 2010).

Attempts to ‘kick off accelerated progress’ towards the MDGs at the 2010 World Summit have, by many accounts, failed and it is highly likely 2015 will not see the halving of poverty and/ or hunger. With this legacy behind us, debates on what comes after the MDGs is well underway, providing a great opportunity to review the application of a significant international development related policy and speculate on what new policy might emerge in the near future. We will do this through the use of short films and proposing questions to encourage you to think and reflect on the global issue of poverty, from a political economy perspective.

The Political Economy of Development

Aims The aims for this week are: 1. T o think about (and address) poverty using a multidimensional and inter-disciplinary lens 2. To gain knowledge about the MDGs – what they are, how they have progressed, possible causes for successes and failure 3. T o explore what, if anything is likely to replace the MDGs after 2015

Learning Outcomes On successful completion of this week you should: 1. B e able to understand analyses of international development, in particular poverty, from a political economy perspective 2. B e familiar with the 8 MDGs and understand the targets and indicators underlying them 3. B e aware of the reasons for success/failure to reach the MDG targets 4. H ave formed a view as to what should replace them post 2015 In this unit we focus on the interconnectedness between economic development and social and political issues such as democratisation, governance, poverty, human rights, gender, armed conflict and the environment. These interconnections can be seen in the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) that followed the UN Millennium Summit and

At its most simple, political economy is the dynamic interaction of states and markets. International Political Economy sometimes known as Global Political Economy, is a relatively new academic sub-discipline within the social sciences. In this view, the political and economic are not seen as discrete domains, but as part of an interactive whole.

It explores the production, reproduction and distribution of power and wealth within the contemporary world order. In recent years, a ‘new’ political economy is emerging that seeks to go beyond a concern with economic interdependence and tries to address also domestic, comparative and global political economy, space, resources and the environment, justice, inequality and development as well as global markets, institutions and regulations.

Task: Watch this Ted Talk http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_ rosling_reveals_new_insights_on_poverty.html Pay attention to what Hans Gosling is saying in terms of the GOALS and the MEANS of ‘getting out of poverty’. Try to complete the table below, the first example has been done for you, find at least 2 others in each category.

*Hulme 2009, **Oxfam 2010

Page 10

Module 2 - EN.indd 10

3/22/13 1:03 PM

GOALS

MEANS

HUMAN RIGHTS

GOOD GOVERNANCE

Thinking/Discussion Point: Gosling refers to factors that address poverty, in terms of a theoretical approach, would you say his approach could/could not be viewed as a political economy approach

Thinking/Discussion Point: If you were tackling poverty, which goals would you prioritise and why? Are there goals you would not focus on or goals you would replace, if so, with what and why?

The Millennium Development Goals

Getting the MDGs On Track?

A broad range of organisations at global, regional, national and local level assist in delivering the MDGs. As well as the UN agencies, regional and government organizations such as, the Millennium Promise Alliance, Inc., the Global Poverty Project, the Micah Challenge, The Youth in Action EU Programme “Cartoons in Action” video project and the 8 Visions of Hope global art project. Most of the large NGOs and many civil society organisations also support and work towards achieving the MDGs, even if they do not always agree with the means and methods.

Already by 2004, failure to achieve the targets was evident.

At this point, with the UK as hosts of the G8 summit and Presidency in 2005, and the world failing to meet the MDG targets, UK NGOs and other civil society groups and organisations launched the now international anti-poverty campaign, Make Poverty History. Aimed at raising awareness of the MDGs and holding government to account in achieving them, a key focus of the campaign has been making trade fairer, cancelling developing country debt, more and better aid, including for governments of the Global North to keep their commitment to allocate 0.7% of Gross Domestic Product to aid.

Check out the Make Poverty History Campaign here: http:// www.makepovertyhistory.org/takeaction/ In 2010 the UN aware of the failures and setbacks in achieving the MDGs, produced a Global Action Plan – Keeping the Promise: United to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals, aimed at kick-starting a process of acceleration towards the MDGs, it was essentially a list of priorities, informed by the many MDG reports. The focus of the plan was on ‘green’ jobs, successful trade negotiations, financial services as well as smallholder farming, food and nutrition security, women’s health and empowerment and rejuvenating MDG 8 the Global Partnership. Importantly, a series of new aid commitments were made, including US$40 billion for a Global Strategy for Women’s and Children’s Health. The US declared it would continue to focus on economic growth and tackling corruption.

At the UN 2012 Summit on Sustainable Development (Rio +20 or the Earth Summit), the UN could show only that 3 of the 21 targets (on poverty, slums and water ) have been achieved ahead of the 2015 deadline. Note these are not the Goals themselves each of which contains a number of targets).

Follow progress against the chart here: http://www.un.org/ millenniumgoals/pdf/2012_Progress_E.pdf

Source: UNDP

While there are a number of areas where progress has been made, the chart also indicates a number of targets against which either no progress has been made and/or the situation has deteriorated since 1990 (the baseline against which progress is measured). There are other targets (despite the

To find out about the Millennium Development Goals (8 Goals, 21 Targets and 60+ indicators), what they are and how much progress has been made, have a look at the UN’s MDG site (http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/bkgd.shtml) .

Look at each of the 8 goals in detail, identify the targets and the indicators check out what the different UN agencies are doing to address the causes of poverty and inequality and meet the targets. Explore the indicators of achievement – there are more than 60 of them!

Page 11

Module 2 - EN.indd 11

3/22/13 1:03 PM

60+ indicators) where the UN does not have either any or sufficient data to arrive at a conclusion regarding progress.

Thinking/Discussion Point: Read the MDG 2012 Report (link above) and pay particular attention to progress and achievements at global, regional and at national level – are there differences? If so, what are they?

Key debates around the MDGs The MDGs have generated much debate from ideological, theoretical and practical perspectives. A great many reports, using different approaches, have described the value and successes and/or failures of the MDGs. In a detailed cross-sectoral analysis, The Lancet Commission (2010) concluded that the positive contribution of the MDGs has been to: - encourage global political consensus - provide a focus for advocacy - improve the targeting and flow of aid, and - improve the monitoring of development projects.

On the other hand, they also noted some shortcomings, - the parsimony of the MDGs, although probably facilitating their acceptance and use, makes them at the same time limited in scope; - their quantitative targets and precise indicators, for all their value in providing measurable outcomes, often fail to capture some crucial elements of goal achievement.

Other positives include, they recognise the multi-dimensional nature of poverty, non-specialists can understand them and the period for showing results is neither too short to be credible nor too long to exert pressure. The list of criticisms from civil society and academics is longer and includes; they are too ‘one-size-fits-all’, unrealistically ambitious for many countries, pay too little attention to inequality or empowerment of the poor, they are anti-growth, many parameters are poorly specified and they make development a problem of/for the Global South rather than link it to consumption patterns in the Global North, while at the same time Goal 8, the only goal with an impact beyond the Global South lacks deadlines and so lets the donors ‘off the hook’ (Manning, 2010)

What Has or Hasn’t Been Achieved?

Progress towards reaching the MDGs has been uneven. Some countries have achieved many of the goals, while others, in particular Sub-Saharan Africa, are not on track to realize any (Hulme, 2009, ODI 2010, Oxfam, 2010, Easterly, 2007).

The MDG Report 2012 states: ‘The target of reducing extreme poverty by half has been reached five years ahead of the 2015 deadline, as has the target of halving the proportion of people who lack dependable access to improved sources of drinking water. Conditions for more than 200 million people living in slums have been ameliorated—double the 2020 target. Primary school enrolment of girls equalled that of boys, and we have seen

accelerating progress in reducing child and maternal mortality’ […] Projections indicate that in 2015 more than 600 million people worldwide will still be using unimproved water sources, almost one billion will be living on an income of less than $1.25 per day, mothers will continue to die needlessly in childbirth, and children will suffer and die from preventable diseases.

Hunger remains a global challenge, and ensuring that all children are able to complete primary education remains a fundamental, but unfulfilled, target that has an impact on all the other Goals. Lack of safe sanitation is hampering progress in health and nutrition, biodiversity loss continues apace, and greenhouse gas emissions continue to pose a major threat to people and ecosystems.

The goal of gender equality also remains unfulfilled, again with broad negative consequences, given that achieving the MDGs depends so much on women’s empowerment and equal access by women to education, work, health care and decision-making. We must also recognize the unevenness of progress within countries and regions, and the severe inequalities that exist among populations, especially between rural and urban areas.’ (UN 2012: foreword).

Task: Watch this TedTalk by Paul Collier author of the much talked about ‘bottom billion’ – those it is claimed have not benefited from the MDGs. http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_ collier_shares_4_ways_to_help_the_bottom_billion.html What do you think of Collier’s solutions? Do they differ from the strategies behind the MDGs?

Post-2015 - More of the Same?

“As 2015 ticks ever closer, international bureaucrats (and I use that term affectionately since I have been one) are deciding how to cook up the next round of goals. We can be assured that there will be another round of MDG-like goals sometime fairly soon because this has been the consistent pattern for much of the last century” (Source: http://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/articles/ development-inequality-and-poverty/what-next-millenniumdevelopment-goals) It is too early to say with certainty what will happen post-2015.

The UN has already started preparing for the post-2015 agenda with member states, civil society and academia all engaged or being engaged in this process which you can read about here: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/beyond2015.shtml You can follow an interactive timeline here: http://www.dipity. com/unitednations/Beyond-2015/.

Many voices academic, civil society and media voices have been adding to the debates on the post-2015 agenda, you can follow some of those here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/globaldevelopment/future-of-development

*re Progress on MDGs (Hulme 2009, ODI 2010, Oxfam 2010, Easterly 2009) UN 2012 Foreward) **Koehler et al 2012

Page 12

Module 2 - EN.indd 12

3/22/13 1:03 PM

Initial suggestions focus on keeping the existing MDGs but extending them beyond 2012 or modifying them with additions and/or adaptations to incorporate measures of economic and social inequality and inequities, human rights, climate change and green growth indicators, and measures of conflict, population dynamics (population growth and ageing) and global public goods or even changing the notion of poverty as an incomebased measure. Yet others in favour of the MDG approach call for consolidation of the goals thus reducing the number of goals, targets and number of indicators (Koehler, et al, 2012).

Around Rio +20 (which was the subject of last week’s lecture), the idea of replacing the MDGs with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) was being muted. These would reflect all three pillars of ‘sustainable development’ – economic, social and environmental. However, SDGs are being proposed lack adequate reference to the political, human rights dimensions of development and could become a ‘greenwash’ – talking environment but fundamentally changing nothing about an economic order that is environmentally destructive(Koehler, et al, 2012).. While Kohler et al (2012) suggest a more radical approach grounded in the human security paradigm is what is called for.

Thinking/Discussion Point: Read this recent article http:// www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-09-16/what-theworld-wants-from-un-goals Do you agree or disagree and why? Based on the possibilities of keeping the current MDGs with more or less of them and with some or no adaptations, or making a more radical shift, what would you prefer and why?

Concluding Remarks Clearly, while the MDGs have provided a rallying point for many actors in the field of international development, they have delivered both successes and failures. The focus now must be on what replaces them and of course much of this will depend on whose analysis of the MDGs is heard and accepted.

Week 4 Conflict and Development Aims The aims for this week are: 1. T o examine the way in which the relationship between conflict and development have been understood, especially from the liberal peace perspective.

2. T o examine how this understanding impacts on policy and practice in international development.

3. To introduce the concept of human security

Learning Outcomes On successful completion of this week you should: 1. u nderstand what the notion of human security is about and

how it relates to development 2. u nderstand the way in which international governance has addressed human insecurity through development assistance and vice versa 3. b e aware of the human cost of contemporary conflict in countries of the Global South In this unit, we turn to the relationship between conflict and development. The notion of human security which has gained ground since the 1990s, makes the rights, concerns and needs of individuals, rather than states, the object of security.

People need security from fear (from threat of force) but also from want (created by poverty, disease, disaster, conflict) – two of the essential freedoms to be protected and upheld by the international community through the United Nations.

Therefore, human security and human development are often referred to as twin concepts. At the same time, both the nature and geography of war have changed, especially in the post Cold War period. Security risks have shifted to the Global South, Sub-Saharan Africa in particular, and most casualties are civilians and overwhelmingly women and children. While human security can be seen as a necessary condition for development, it is not a sufficient condition and indeed, underdevelopment or a failure to address its root causes can be a source as well as a consequence of conflict. Human development is then an important means to create human security. It is this complex relationship, and the nexus between conflict and development which has converged especially in the post 9/11 period as poverty and inequality are considered to be national, regional and global security threats, and the implications it poses for international development policy and strategies that will be explored this week.

Are War and Conflict the Same Thing?

Thinking/DIscussion Point: Ask yourself the following questions? What is conflict? Is it the same as war? Is conflict always violent, is war? Can we measure the causes and consequences of war?

Although often used interchangeably, war and conflict do not have the same meaning.

Classification and definition of both war and conflict are fraught with difficulties related to, among other things, the availability and reliability of data. Conflict is generally understood to mean tension between opposing views, interests or wills but it need not be violent and violence need not always be physical. War is treated as a special category of conflict and is always violent but the data used to analyse the links between war and development have limitations and are controversial (Suhrke and Chaudhary, 2009, Williams, 1994 in Desai and Potter, 2002, Human Security Report, 2005).

While ‘tens of thousands’ of government officials collect data on the economy, health, the environment, education and so on and send it on to international agencies for collation and analysis, the same is not true of data related to war (Suhrke & Chaudhary, 2009, Human Security Report 2005). It is

*Suhrke & Chaudhary 2009, Human See report 2005)

Page 13

Module 2 - EN.indd 13

3/22/13 1:03 PM

important to note this because these data help governments and international organisations formulate policy at national, global and regional levels. “It would be inconceivable for the World Bank to make broad policy recommendations that were not backed by official cross-national trend data. Yet the UN, the international organisation charged with protecting and enhancing global security, has no comparable data on armed conflict to help it formulate and evaluate its security policies.”

(Human Security Report 2005:18) This is also important because it affects categorisations and definitions of war and conflict.

Most recent work and the reference point for this module in regard to war and conflict statistics is that of the Uppasala University Conflict Data Program and the International Peace Research Institute, Oslo (PRIO). Together their work provides the data for the Human Security Report. The preference here is to present only Uppasala/PRIO based data related to war.

Thinking/Discussion Point: Try to identify WHERE the various categories of conflict are in the world.

Case Study Part 1: Defining War and Conflict The Human Security Report identifies 4 types of state-based conflict: (according to intensity and number of battle-related deaths): Interstate – between states intrastate (civil) – within states extrastate,- a conflict between a state and a non-state group outside of the state’s own territory.

Internationalized internal conflict - essentially an intrastate conflict in which the government, the opposition, or both, receive military support from another government or governments, and where the foreign troops actively participate in the conflict.

However, in many places conflict between non-state actors, for example local war lords, is the cause of great human suffering yet such conflict is not included in the Uppasala/PRIO data sets and rarely measured at all. The Human Security Centre measured such conflict for 2002 and 2003 and there were actually more non-state conflicts in both 2002 and 2003 than state based conflicts—though the non-state conflicts involved considerably fewer fatalities (Human Security Report 2005:21).

Also note the Uppasala/PRIO dataset has not included genocide and massacres, ‘one-sided violence’ but does for the years 2002 and 2003.

Let us turn now to look at the statistics related to armed conflict. All graphics and tables that follow are sourced from the Human Security Report 2009/2010

*Human Security Report 2005:18, Uppasala University Conflict Data Program and The International Peace Research Institute, Oslo

Page 14

Module 2 - EN.indd 14

3/22/13 1:03 PM

Case Study Part 1 Based on Ikejiaku, B.V. (2009))The Relationship between Poverty, Conflict and Development’, Journal of Sustainable Development, Vol 2, No. 1, March 2009 The last set of graphs shows Sub-Saharan Africa has been one of the most conflict-prone regions since 1946 and continues to be one of the most conflict-prone regions today. This region is also the only region that is unlikely to meet most of the Millennium Development Goals – the goals set by the international community to reduce poverty and inequality by 2015.

The Nature of Conflicts in Africa Africa has been experiencing a plethora of conflicts endangering the continent’s international order and development over the last three decades, particularly in the 1990s. Africa could be said to have witnessed four major types of conflicts, these include secessions, civil wars, regional conflicts, and internal crises.

Secession Biafra’s dogged efforts to secede from Nigeria (1967), the notorious Katanga rebellion in Congo (now DRC 1970s), are notable examples. Usually, the seceding entities pursue autonomy, instead of formal or total independence.

Another form of conflict is civil wars (wars between government state army and the armed forces of a rebel government); these usually start as minor internal crises, but develop to fully fledged war, which are fought with conventional weapons. Although, it is extremely difficult to draw a line between civil war and regional or international wars, many civil wars have been connected with regional or inter-state conflicts. Countries in Africa, particularly those in the Horn of Africa, and for example Democratic Republic of Congo (1998-03), Somalia (1998), Sudan (since 2003), Angola (1975-02), Rwanda (1990-94), Kenya (1991/92, 1997), Ethiopia and Eritrea (1998-2000) and others have all involved in civil wars (Wayande, 1997)).

Regional conflict in the continent has been classified as being

‘irredentist’ (Ruiz, 1997: 1) in character. Conflict is termed as being irredentist when one country harbours some territorial ambitions over another country. Good examples of this form of conflict in Africa include the Somali claim on the Ogaden region of Ethiopia (in early 1970s), and Libya’s strive to annex part of northern Chad (early 1980s). The case of Tanzania and Uganda (1979) is a similar conflict, since Tanzania (under President Julius Nyerere) projected its forces over Uganda, in a bid to oust the Ugandan leader (President Idi Amin). Also the combined efforts by some African countries in overthrowing the Mobutu Sese Seko’s government in Zaire (1997) are yet other regional conflicts (Wayande, 1997).

Internal crises here mean disturbances of any kind which affect the state of peace and security, these among others include rampages, riots, and violent demonstrations. The Soweto riots in apartheid South Africa in 1976, Fanatical cult killings in March 2000 associated to the movement for the restoration of the ten commandments of God, also the Bryanda riots of 1994 (in Uganda), and series of students’ riots in Nigeria between 1999 and 2006 are germane.

Case Study Part 2: Factors shaping conflict and development in Africa Modernisation, democratisation and colonisation Scholars have emerged with different theoretical explanations for the causes of conflict in Africa. In the face of present crises in Africa, the flaws underlying both modernisation and democratisation theories and the theory of colonialism are

*Wayande 1997 , Ruiz 1997:1

Page 15

Module 2 - EN.indd 15

3/22/13 1:03 PM

being exposed. The long held notion that modernity would result in smooth transition from authoritarian system to democratic system, with gradual elimination of conflict has failed woefully in Africa (Irobi, 2005: 2). Again, the view that the end of colonialism (1960 onwards) – the theory that the end of social, political and economic control of the developing countries by the advanced capitalist nations, particularly the colonialists (Abbah, 1996: 6), would lead to peaceful African states did not stand, as Africa has been besieged with plethora of conflicts since the end of Colonialism.

Economic The proponents of economic theory contend that the propensity to indulge in violent conflict is higher for low income or less educated people (Ehrlick, 1973: 521-26). A corollary of this position is that poor economic conditions and low quality of life could serve as a breeding ground for conflict. However, for the fact that poor economic conditions might result from different problems bedevilling Africa, economic factors could not fully explain conflicts in Africa. For example, Glaeser (2002) argues against economic factors noting that political leaders often encourage individuals and groups to engage in violence conflict in order to promote and project their parochial and egocentric interests.

Militarisation Militarisation has also been employed to explain the cause of conflict in Africa. The exponents of this theory argue that violent conflict in Africa could be understood in the series of military weapons that have been employed in devastating and disintegrating many developing countries, particularly in Africa.

Mohammed (1999: 1) for example argues that the intensity and frequency of civil wars in developing countries have increased unabated throughout the 1990s. However, Omitoogun (2004: 3) argues that in associating militarization and conflict, caution needs to be taken because rather than the proliferation of arms in the society, it is the welfare-reducing effects of militarisation that causes violence. Besides, when it is appreciated that developed countries with more sophisticated arms than Africa are not in conflict like the later, militarisation as an explanation becomes weak.

Ethnicity Ethnicity is another crucial explanatory tool to the continent’s plethora of conflicts. Theorists believe that ethnicity underlies virtually all conflicts in Africa, since ethnic groups in their bid to compete for scarce resources such as property rights, jobs, education, and social amenities engage in violence.

In his study Nnoli (1980) employed empirical evidence associating conflict to ethnic problems. However, Elbadawi and Sambanis (2000: 1) questioned the ethno-cultural and linguistic explanation for conflict in the continent, rather linking Africa’s conflicts to other factors – poverty, absence of democratisation and over dependence on natural resources.

Collier (1997) argues that Africa is not inherently prone to war as a result of ethnic disparities, but the continent’s experiences of many wars, is fundamentally because it is poor and poverty is both the cause and consequence of Africa’s wars.

Population Population is another important factor to African conflicts.

It is argued that there has been tremendous increase in the population of developing countries, which has superseded economic growth. According to the RCA (2005: 112), between 1980 and 2002, the population of Sub-Saharan Africa has grown from 383 to 689 million people, which is an increase of 80 percent. In contrast, in much of Africa, very little economic growth has occurred over the past fifty years. For example, no other region of the world more urgently needs economic growth. However, instead of the desperately needed economic growth, Sub-Saharan Africa as a region has seen a decline in per capita GDP from $575 in 1980 to $524 in 2003 (World Bank, 2005, in Schaefer 2005)..Some countries are even poorer today than they were thirty years ago. Sub-Sahara Africa has had the lowest Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for decades (Marke, 2007: 1). Supporters of this explanatory tool therefore argue that high population growth has made things difficult in developing countries, as people have to scramble for available resources, which results to conflicts. However, countries like India, China and others have larger populations than most African countries, but they are not in violent conflicts like Africa.

Volatile climate and environmentalism The argument that African conflict is as a result of volatile climate and elementary forces (such as drought and famine) in its environment that have affected growth, has been challenged by scholars. Sen (1999: 61-63) for example argues that famine, drought and related disaster are not allowed to occur in democratic polities because people have established mechanism to compel governments to address their needs and pressing problems. Also, Wisner (1988) argues that drought and other environmental problems cannot directly explain the 1986 disaster that hit 13 African countries since ten of these thirteen affected countries have experienced other problems such as war, civil strife, destabilisation (including apartheid) and a massive influx of refugees.

Political corruption Trends of events in the past three decades reveal that political corruption is the ‘root’ cause of conflict in Africa. The contention here is that political corruption by sapping the economy of Africa renders the continent poor or worsens its poverty situation. And this renders most of the states in the continent incapable of providing the basic needs of the people.

Burton’s (1979, 1997) human needs theory on conflict and conflict management recognises the indispensability of these needs, by pointing out that wherever such non-negotiable

*Irobi 2005:3, Abbah 1996:6, Ehrlick 1973: -521-26, Glaeser 2002, Mohammed 1999:1, Omitoogen 2004, Moli 1980, Elbadawi & Sambians 2000:1, Collier 1997, RCA 2005, Marke 2007, Sen 1999:61-63, Wisner 1998, Bur1ton 1979,1997, Fapohunda 2002:26

Page 16

Module 2 - EN.indd 16

3/22/13 1:03 PM

needs are not met, conflict is inevitable. Since political corruption is perpetrated by leaders entrusted with a nation’s coffers, the masses normally react by engaging in violence.

According to the United Nations Human Development Report (in Fapohunda, 2002: 26), sixty percent of Africans live in abject poverty. The problem of poverty is compounded by the issue of corruption of the state resources, 37% of Africa’s assets are held abroad; Fapohunda (Ibid) argues that this figure, the highest for any region in the world, was more of the fruit of corruption. Egbo (2002: 289) maintains that, ‘this is public money siphoned overseas by corrupt political and military rulers for their personal use, the problem of poverty and breakdown among most third world countries has its root in the illegitimate and arbitrary methods of these men… the growth of the society becomes stunted’.

The Liberal theory of violence sees underdevelopment as a source of conflict and development (and increasingly democracy) as a prerequisite for peace. From this perspective, periods of change be it economic growth or decline, political transitions, or social innovation such as those recently attributed to globalisation —are associated with conflict.

Existing institutions come under pressure and change is likely to be uneven and to create a sense of relative deprivation, injustice, and threat among the losers (Suhrke & Chaudhary, 2009). A competing view is that conflict and potential violence are a consequence not a cause of development because the development process involves redistribution of power and resources. In this view, however, potential conflict can be contained by policy measures that emphasis institutions that build democracy.

Thinking/Discussion Point: Which view do you hold to – underdevelopment is the cause of conflict or conflict is the cause of underdevelopment ?

Case Study Part 3: The Cost of Conflict in Africa Consequences of Conflicts Conflict has destabilised most African countries, Wanyande (1997: 1-2) discloses that the costs of conflicts in Africa in terms of loss of human life and property, and the destruction of social infrastructure are enormous: Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed in many of the countries in which the conflicts occur. Many others have also suffered and continue to suffer untold psychological trauma associated with conflicts… once conflicts occur, Journal of Sustainable Development March, 2009 19 scarce resources are inevitably diverted to the purchase of military equipment at the expense of socio-economic development (Ibid).

The Report of the Commission for Africa also notes that

conflict causes as many deaths in Africa each year as epidemic diseases and is responsible for more deaths and displacements than famine or flood. When people are forced to flee their homes, poverty associated ailments such as malnutrition and diseases follow. Those who suffer most from conflicts are the poor and vulnerable, including children and women. Statistics reveal that there are 13 million displaced people in Africa, particularly due to conflicts and 3.5 million refugees (RCA, 2005: 107). Example includes Northern Uganda (2005), Kenya (1991/92), Rwanda (since 1994) and others.

Making brief reference to the report of the commission of Africa (Ibid): Out of sight of the world, in the biggest death toll since the Second World War, around 1,000 people die every day in the Democratic Republic of Congo. It is only one of Africa’s many conflicts. In recent decades Africa experienced more brutal coups, drawn … and bloody instability than any other part of the world.

The costs of conflicts are horrific, and in many cases conflicts wiped out the achievements of decades of economic and social development. Armed conflicts, in particular, involve complete economic paralysis, immense social costs and trauma, political quagmire and disintegration, as well as serious environmental degradation and dilapidation.

The RCA (2005: 161) also notes that some conflicts, like violence in Darfur, have been of high intensity, however, it observed that ‘there are countless smaller conflicts, such as those between herders and cultivators that are to be found in many parts of Africa, which are no less vicious’. Violence from these smaller conflicts also causes as many deaths in Africa as do diseases. For example, the human cost resulting from localised conflicts is devastating, since many are even sent to a ‘state of limbo’: Millions of lives have been lost… As a result of ‘localised’ conflict in Nigeria, for example, at least 10,000 people lost their lives between 1999 and 2003, and an estimated 800,000 were internally displaced. More people have been forced to flee their homes in Africa than anywhere else in the world; many ending up in the slums of already – over crowded cities and towns. Malnutrition and disease increase. And those who suffer most are the poor and the vulnerable. War and conflicts does not only harm people. It destroys roads, bridges, farming equipments, telecommunications, as well as water and sanitation systems. It shuts down hospitals and schools.

It slows trade and economic life, sometimes to a halt. The very fabric of society is torn asunder (RCA, 2005: 38).

The consequences of conflicts are much wider; conflict also weakens the stability of Africa and even extends its ‘destructive tentacles’ to global peace – ‘instability in Africa undermines global security. States weakened by strife increase international refugee flows. They also become havens for international terrorist organisations...’ (RCA: 38). In these ugly trends, it may seem odd to talk of optimism in most African

*Egbo 2002:289, Suhrke & Chaudhary 2009, Wanyande 1997: 1-2, Uppsala 2013

Page 17

Module 2 - EN.indd 17

3/22/13 1:03 PM

countries where conflicts have become common, as in Nigeria (since 1985), apartheid South Africa (1948-1994), Mozambique (1976-1992) and DRC (1996-2001); others include Sudan (1983-2003), Somalia (1981-2002), Sierra Leone (19912000), Liberia (1989-2003) Rwanda (1990-ongoing), Burundi (1991-onging), Angola (1975-2002) and host of other African countries (Uppsala, 2003).

Thinking/Discussion Point: If violence is necessary for development to take place, should we defend suffering for the sake of progress?

Human Security and Addressing Conflict and Development The notion of human security has been gaining ground since the 1990s and is said to have first been made operational in the Human Development Report 1994: “it means first, safety from chronic threats such as hunger, disease and repression. And second it means protection from sudden and hurtful disruptions in the patterns of daily life – whether in homes, in jobs or in communities.

Such threats can exist at all levels of national income and development” (UN Human Development Report, 1994:23).

Some years later, the Commission on Human Security, in its final report, Human Security Now , insisted that human security means “…protecting people from critical (severe) and pervasive (widespread) threats and situations. It means using processes that build on people’s strengths and aspirations.

It means creating political, social, environmental, economic, military and cultural systems that together give people the building blocks of survival, livelihood and dignity.” (CHS: 2003: 4).

As Thomas (2001) notes, “Such human security is indivisible; it cannot be pursued by or for one group at the expense of another”(Thomas 2001:161). As well as having at its core the satisfaction of basic material human needs – food, shelter, education and health care – it also calls for freedom from oppressive power structures and involves an ‘active and substantive’ notion of democracy which ensures every individual the opportunity to participate in the decisions that affect their lives. States have the authority and responsibility to responsibility to address the human security needs of their citizens. Where is conflict, as demonstrated in the case study, states are not always able or willing to play this role. When this happens, the global governance institutions which bear a collective responsibility to pursue human security must step in.

In general in the post Cold War period and especially since 9/11 all the major institutions of global governance have given more attention to both development and human security partly because poverty and inequality are increasingly considered to be national, regional and global security threats. In many armed conflict situations this takes the form of a peace building and/or peace keeping ‘package’

(Suhrke and Chaudhuary, 2009). The premise of this package is an expanded version of already existing (liberal) models of development – institutions that ensure political democracy, encourage free trade and address systemic social, economic, and political inequalities. Developed by the major donors and aid agencies, the international financial institutions (the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the regional development banks), and the UN specialized agencies (especially UNDP, the World Food Programme, and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees) as well as the UN secretariat. The ‘peacebuilding package’ was further streamlined by international organizations such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which started harmonizing guidelines for aid from the rich industrialized states to peacebuilding activities.

Peacebuilding involves both economic and political reforms aimed at providing the foundation for peaceful reconstruction and development. Political reforms typically mean elections, with participation of political parties and the establishment of plural institutions. Civil society organizations and a free media are encouraged. On the economic side, reforms focused on market mechanisms, a minimalist but effective state, and macroeconomic stability. In addition, human rights monitoring is strengthened and legal reforms patterned on Western legal traditions initiated. Peacebuilding and peace keeping are important areas of activity for the global governance regime but in practice they face many challenges.

Thinking/Discussion Point: Can you think of any limitations to the liberal approach/package for addressing conflict in the Global South?

Concluding Remarks While the number of armed conflicts may be falling the impact is still considerable. Unfortunately, most armed conflict is now located in the poorer countries of the Global South, SubSaharan Africa in particular. To the devastation of poverty and inequality is added the devastation of violence and conflict.

The study of war and conflict and its relationship to and with development and the root causes of underdevelopment has not always been a priority for developmental theorists with implications for the policy process. However, over the last decade and particularly since 9/11 and the ‘war on terror’ global governance institutions have taken much more interest in these issues because, from the liberal perspective, poverty and inequality undermine peace and development.

Development’s policy prescriptions are political democracy and free trade. The expanded focus on human security together with the ongoing emphasis on eradicating poverty is bringing the two agendas closer together. Some argue the results of this on policy and practice in addressing the nexus of conflict and development only serve to provide the Global North innovative ways to control the Global South (Duffield, 2001).

*Thomas 2001, Suhrke & Duffield 2001

Page 18

Module 2 - EN.indd 18

3/22/13 1:03 PM

Unit 5: An Introduction to Gender Awareness, Human Rights and Human Security

and Qualification Association (www.ecqa.org) under Access International Development. Content will be available from early 2013.

Aims The aims for this week are: 1. T o introduce the human rights and women’s rights legal frameworks 2. T o introduce the concepts of human rights, the rights-based approach and the human security approach as used and applied in international development 3. T o examine how these have shaped policy and practice

Learning Outcomes On successful completion of this week you should: 1. B e familiar with the philosophical and historical underpinnings of human rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 2. B e aware of what development theorists and practitioners mean when they talk about the rights-based approach and the human security approach to development 3. H ave an understanding of how these concepts are being applied in practice If you are interested in continuing your learning, the content for Unit 5 can be accessed via the European Certification and Qualification Association (www.ecqa.org) under Access International Development. Content will be available from early 2013.

Week 6: An Introduction to Sustainable Development and Climate Justice Aims The aims for this week are: 1. T o understand the concept of sustainable development and how it relates to human development 2. T o explore key environmental issues and how they interlink with key concerns and aims of international development 3. T o investigate the emergence of climate justice

Learning Outcomes On successful completion of this week you should: 1. Know what sustainable development means 2. B e clear about how sustainable development relates to both human development and the environment 3. B e able to distinguish between climate change and climate justice If you are interested in continuing your learning, the content for Unit 6 can be accessed via the European Certification Page 19

Module 2 - EN.indd 19

3/22/13 1:03 PM

For more information on the programme please contact Roisin McEvoy International Development Programme University of Ulster Northern Ireland Email: r.mcevoy@ulster.ac.uk Or visit the project website www.aidproject.eu This project has been funded with the support from the European Commission under the Lifelong Learning Programme. This website reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Module 2 - EN.indd 20

3/22/13 1:03 PM