Delivering AID

Charles Benbrook (benbrook@hillnet.com)
Wed, 30 Aug 1995 16:55:52 -0400 (EDT)

Thanks Dennis for your excellent and informative post. I have never been
to Africa, and am glad to hear some World Bank projects have helped raise
productivity levels. A couple of points:
1. WB is best for infrastructure development involving large
capital-intensive projects that are clearly linked to increased economic
activity, soi that the loans lead reliably to the economic activity
needed to pay for them. WB role in sustainable development in rural
areas remains to be scene; yes, roads and fertilizer supplies can and
often must be a part of the equation, and the WB, FAO and other
donors/aid agencies are relatively good at delivering that kind of
assistance. The problem is the field level ability, will, capacity to
integrate new infrastructure and inputs into sustainable production
systems. This is the part of projects routinelky identified as
problematic. And so, I think it is the area that deserves the most
attention, and that progress in it should be a pre-requisite for loaning
tons of money for infrastructure, which can be paied off only if all
three legs of the stool are present and balanced.

2. Best success in delivering aid has been through small, regionally
based, quasi-locally, quasi-nationally controlled foundations. Good
models exist in L.A. and Asia. The WB and UN system shoulkd be running
the majority of their farmer-level development aid dollars through these
foundations. To do so donors have to overcome resistance in country,
since elites and politicians like controlling the flow of external aid
funds; it sustains them. Donors have a responsibility to honestly
appraise and respond to the effectiveness of aid dollars and how they are
spent. As competition and need for dollars grows far beyond supply, one
positive way to make choices is to support sus dev. projects in those
regions wioth a local delivering and administrative infrastructure, if
you will, that will get lots done with available dollars. From my work
with UNDP I do not think it is particularly difficult to predict where
quality implementation can occur, and it is surely not difficult to do
annual program reviews that settle the issue. Aid agencies typically
know a lot about how well money is spent, but are relatively powerless to
affect change. If the money is in the 5-year plan, if Congress has
appropriated it, the money gets spent. Period. Aid needs to be delivered
in smaller chunks, subject to continuously review and mid-course
corrections, and for longer periods of time, to get the most out of each
dollar.