Foreign Aid: A Critical Analysis of its Consequences on National Political and Economic Systems in Sub-Saharan Africa
In recent years, the system of aid provision by richer countries to developing countries has increasingly been discussed, questioned and criticized. The major criticisms are made by four different schools of thought:
- the neo-marxist school of thought, which views aid as an instrument through which industrialized countries seek to perpetuate their domination over developing countries. Aid is, according to this school, a modern form of imperialism
- populist critics in Western countries, which protest that aid to Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) deviates Western tax-payer money to other countries
- the neoliberal view emphasizes the perverse effect of aid, which, by supporting undemocratic, corrupt leaders in different parts of Africa, tends to forget ideals of democracy and liberalism
- a pragmatic school, pointing out to the fact that much of the aid is ineffective or used in areas it wasn't primarily intended to be used in
These critics have received much attention recently. Yet on the other hand, it has simultaneously been demonstrated that foreign aid, in many cases, still remains vitally important, or at least very useful, for economic development in SSA. In Ghana for example, where 86% of the population were lacking access to sanitation in 2012, and where this lack of sanitation contributes to 70% of water-borne diseases of the country, the government is still heavily relying on foreign investment. Through various specific projects targeting clean water and sanitation access, Safe Water Access, an NGO founded by late actor Paul Newman and former chairman of Goldman Sachs John Whitehead, performs rather successfully and proves to be an essential actor of development in Ghana. There are many similar success-stories of various water and sanitation projects led by NGOs, foundations or international organizations in SSA, for example these ones. Moreover, major aid providers like The Gates Foundation and US Aid regularly have independent evaluations of their investments conducted, and continuously seek to improve their collaboration with local entities.
Hence, the question of aid isn't that simple... its necessity cannot be denied, yet critics point to equally substantial negative aspects. Moving away from simplistic, Manichean visions, I would like to share my thoughts on the impact of aid on state power, authority and legitimacy, a very relevant political subject that unfortunately has tended to be overlooked.
Aid dependency
Why is it that aid is sometimes unproductive and even has perverse economic effects? Since decolonialisation, the majority of SSA countries have been receiving aid from richer countries in order to foster economic growth and improve social welfare. As a result of this long-lasting trend, governments have become used to relying on foreign financial help for achieving core objectives of economic and social development. Aid has certainly enabled governments to strengthen political institutions, to rise their civil servants' wages, and to boost the economy's general efficiency - in Botswana for instance, many projects have been made possible by aid. The problem, however, of this is that those governments expect a lot from aid, and are therefore very often dependent upon its provision for performing tasks traditionally performed by the state. These tasks, which are mainly about guaranteeing socioeconomic welfare to citizens, are inherent parts of a state's sovereignty - if the state is able to provide for economic development and social welfare, notably in terms of water and sanitation access, its authority will be held legitimate by its citizens, and thus it will be able to keep on exerting its sovereignty over them.
In other words, continuous aid provision has led to aid dependence, which in turn has undermined state capacities and authority. These perverse effects have been exacerbated by bad project management planning: each project requires oversight by government officials, which have been found to devote a lot of time to this, at the expense of their ministries' own priorities. In Ghana for instance, each government official spends on average 44 weeks a year on donor project supervision - a real lot of time!!! To make up for this, independent supervising institutions were set up, but conversely, they increase competition with government institutions, which ends up deteriorating their sovereignty again...
The replacement of states by NGOs?
Beside aid dependency, another challenge to state authority pointed out by political scientists is the rise of NGOs in health, notably water access development schemes. This historical evolution is part of the world's evolution towards globalization, and neoliberalism. Globalization led to the appearance of new issues of global relevance which would only inadequately be addressed by traditional national institutions. These issues were therefore handed over to NGOs, which receive much of their funding from states, the UN, the EU and private foundations - all, in that sense, active actors of the deliberate normative promotion of NGOs. This goes along with the development of neoliberalism and the restructuration of democracy in ways that matched capitalism: one of the features of neoliberalism is the achievement of a minimalist role for the state and, insofar, of the privatization of the public sphere. However, even in neoliberalism, core jobs previously done by states still need to be performed. In that context, NGOs are promoted as agents working "for the greater good" and representing the interests of the people - whereby they pose serious challenges to state legitimacy and even raison d'être.
In Mozambique, this evolution had dramatic consequences. Expatriates working in NGOs were better paid and more effective than most of the local agencies. Although some Mozambicans were employed in those NGOs, the large majority of the population wasn't, which created resentment among health workers and fragmented the health sector. It also increased social inequities within the sector. Overall, the arrival of NGO expatriate workers contributed to the disempowerment of the Mozambican public health sector, and therefore weakened state structures. Besides, it led to a massive 'brain drain' of national health workers who decided to leave Mozambique, where they couldn't see any more future.
What solutions?
Aid provision is a vicious circle which is very dangerous for states as it undermines their authority, sovereignty and legitimacy. In the long-term, African states need to be strong if they are to achieve political and socioeconomic development. Therefore, while aid provision is still vital to most of SSA countries and thus cannot be given up, it should be redesigned in order to really be beneficial to all actors of development. Notably by engaging in greater cooperation with local actors as well as being careful not to support corruption, even indirectly. So, dear readers, if you have any more ideas on how to achieve that, you are very welcome to suggest your ideas in the comments! :)
Sarah Champagne
- the neo-marxist school of thought, which views aid as an instrument through which industrialized countries seek to perpetuate their domination over developing countries. Aid is, according to this school, a modern form of imperialism
- populist critics in Western countries, which protest that aid to Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) deviates Western tax-payer money to other countries
- the neoliberal view emphasizes the perverse effect of aid, which, by supporting undemocratic, corrupt leaders in different parts of Africa, tends to forget ideals of democracy and liberalism
- a pragmatic school, pointing out to the fact that much of the aid is ineffective or used in areas it wasn't primarily intended to be used in
These critics have received much attention recently. Yet on the other hand, it has simultaneously been demonstrated that foreign aid, in many cases, still remains vitally important, or at least very useful, for economic development in SSA. In Ghana for example, where 86% of the population were lacking access to sanitation in 2012, and where this lack of sanitation contributes to 70% of water-borne diseases of the country, the government is still heavily relying on foreign investment. Through various specific projects targeting clean water and sanitation access, Safe Water Access, an NGO founded by late actor Paul Newman and former chairman of Goldman Sachs John Whitehead, performs rather successfully and proves to be an essential actor of development in Ghana. There are many similar success-stories of various water and sanitation projects led by NGOs, foundations or international organizations in SSA, for example these ones. Moreover, major aid providers like The Gates Foundation and US Aid regularly have independent evaluations of their investments conducted, and continuously seek to improve their collaboration with local entities.
 |
| A man using a water treatment plant built by an NGO - Source: https://www.issuelab.org/resources/23892/23892.pdf?_ga=2.36434275.2113331036.1542201025-1029571488.1542201025 |
Aid dependency
Why is it that aid is sometimes unproductive and even has perverse economic effects? Since decolonialisation, the majority of SSA countries have been receiving aid from richer countries in order to foster economic growth and improve social welfare. As a result of this long-lasting trend, governments have become used to relying on foreign financial help for achieving core objectives of economic and social development. Aid has certainly enabled governments to strengthen political institutions, to rise their civil servants' wages, and to boost the economy's general efficiency - in Botswana for instance, many projects have been made possible by aid. The problem, however, of this is that those governments expect a lot from aid, and are therefore very often dependent upon its provision for performing tasks traditionally performed by the state. These tasks, which are mainly about guaranteeing socioeconomic welfare to citizens, are inherent parts of a state's sovereignty - if the state is able to provide for economic development and social welfare, notably in terms of water and sanitation access, its authority will be held legitimate by its citizens, and thus it will be able to keep on exerting its sovereignty over them.
 |
| Aid Dependency - Source: https://www.cartoonmovement.com/collection/99 |
In other words, continuous aid provision has led to aid dependence, which in turn has undermined state capacities and authority. These perverse effects have been exacerbated by bad project management planning: each project requires oversight by government officials, which have been found to devote a lot of time to this, at the expense of their ministries' own priorities. In Ghana for instance, each government official spends on average 44 weeks a year on donor project supervision - a real lot of time!!! To make up for this, independent supervising institutions were set up, but conversely, they increase competition with government institutions, which ends up deteriorating their sovereignty again...
The replacement of states by NGOs?
Beside aid dependency, another challenge to state authority pointed out by political scientists is the rise of NGOs in health, notably water access development schemes. This historical evolution is part of the world's evolution towards globalization, and neoliberalism. Globalization led to the appearance of new issues of global relevance which would only inadequately be addressed by traditional national institutions. These issues were therefore handed over to NGOs, which receive much of their funding from states, the UN, the EU and private foundations - all, in that sense, active actors of the deliberate normative promotion of NGOs. This goes along with the development of neoliberalism and the restructuration of democracy in ways that matched capitalism: one of the features of neoliberalism is the achievement of a minimalist role for the state and, insofar, of the privatization of the public sphere. However, even in neoliberalism, core jobs previously done by states still need to be performed. In that context, NGOs are promoted as agents working "for the greater good" and representing the interests of the people - whereby they pose serious challenges to state legitimacy and even raison d'être.
 |
| "Why aid is bad for Africa" - Source: https://atlantablackstar.com/2014/07/15/7-reasons-why-foreign-aid-has-not-helped-black-people-in-africa/ |
In Mozambique, this evolution had dramatic consequences. Expatriates working in NGOs were better paid and more effective than most of the local agencies. Although some Mozambicans were employed in those NGOs, the large majority of the population wasn't, which created resentment among health workers and fragmented the health sector. It also increased social inequities within the sector. Overall, the arrival of NGO expatriate workers contributed to the disempowerment of the Mozambican public health sector, and therefore weakened state structures. Besides, it led to a massive 'brain drain' of national health workers who decided to leave Mozambique, where they couldn't see any more future.
What solutions?
Aid provision is a vicious circle which is very dangerous for states as it undermines their authority, sovereignty and legitimacy. In the long-term, African states need to be strong if they are to achieve political and socioeconomic development. Therefore, while aid provision is still vital to most of SSA countries and thus cannot be given up, it should be redesigned in order to really be beneficial to all actors of development. Notably by engaging in greater cooperation with local actors as well as being careful not to support corruption, even indirectly. So, dear readers, if you have any more ideas on how to achieve that, you are very welcome to suggest your ideas in the comments! :)
 |
| How Aid Can Fuel Corruption - Source: https://www.cartoonstock.com/directory/f/foreign_aid.asp |
Good Afternoon Sarah, this post is extremely interesting, and the questions that it raises were also mine too, espacially when it comes to me the occasion to move into and contribuate to humanitarian associations' funds. This is a very sensitive subject. Firstly, appearing that this is a part of the developped countries' duties to share their wealth and non-acting on an selfish behaviour, but as you brightly said, dependancy gets a place and maintain the situation as bad as it is.
RépondreSupprimerMoreover, it contributes very well to the introduction of private sector in public fields, jeoparadizing the real needs of citizens (espacially for cases that no other choice exists).
I would have some wonderings that came to me reading your article, and which potentially widen the reflexion.
You write "being careful not to support corruption". This is actually a very important point that is often present in this systems. Indeed, according to the paradigm school, much of the aids is ineffective or used in areas it was not supposed to be used in, it is thus obvious that governments or decision makers use the humanitary issues to support other causes. We can go on the worst-case that these last stakeholders can consider to provoque humanitarian crisis to get these foreign funds. I was wondering how is this non-efficiency measured ? According which critierias? And who assess it? Therefore, do you know how, or if, is it possible to verify, control the corruption? And if yes, who do you think that would carry the responsability of the judgement?
Also I would like to add that I don't really agree with foreign aids merely because of the "foreign" dimension to this "solution" (that I don't really consider to be one). Actually, my opinion is that nothing more complicated than acting on environment, culture, history you don't really know exists. The help is precious, but it should be led from inside, supported by outside, not the opposit. Solidarity is wonderful, when it is a drivng force, not when it is chosen as a survival SOLUTION. Indeed, solutions and responses are often mistaken.
Thank for this very interesting post, that helped me to think further about my position toward these humanitarian organisations and their actions.
Hi Julie, thank you for your nice comments on this post! :) I definitely agree with you on aid, we should indeed be extremely careful in the way we use it. I had a look at how aid efficiency is measured to answer your really interesting question. There are different assessment methods, but they all rely on diverse criteria to assess efficiency. The QuODA methodology looks at indicators like the share of aid that goes to well-governed countries, and at the focus area of aid in each recipient country: https://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/quoda-methodology-2018.pdf
SupprimerOECD also has many assessment criteria, e.g. to what extent were the objectives achieved, and are they still valid, was it cost-efficient, was it achieved on time, how many people were affected by aid provision... have a look there: http://www.oecd.org/dac/evaluation/daccriteriaforevaluatingdevelopmentassistance.htm
World Bank also measures aid effectiveness by combining key indicators like mortality rate, impact on pregnant women, prevalence of HIV and other diseases, etc: https://data.worldbank.org/topic/aid-effectiveness
I hope this answers your question. I think therefore that it is possible to limit corruption, especially given QuODA indicator of how much aid was received by well-governed countries. In order to limit corruption I think aid donors could work in partnership with local communities rather than with national governments only. I actually think this is the main point, because not only does it limit corruption, it also empowers local people. If local people are granted the right to supervise/take part in aid provision and humanitarian missions, they become part of their country's political sphere so they feel empowered, and they feel proud to improve the life of their communities. Also, locally it is easier to control where money goes and whom it benefits, so that corruption is limited.
- Posted on behalf of Sarah Champagne -