Evaluate the view that development aid has been largely ineffective in reducing inequalities in developing countries
(20 marks)
- A discussion of how far aid has helped reduce inequalities in developing countries is needed.
- Provide evidence - aid responses to the Haiti earthquake (mainly viewed negatively) or to the ebola outbreak (judged more successfully)
- The answer needs to focus on how far inequalities (e.g. gender, income) might be reduced by the aid, whether successfully or not
- The best answers will:
- Evaluate between different examples as part of a 'balanced argument'
- Consider why aid was more successful (or less ineffective) in one example than another
- Reach a logical supported conclusion.
Answer
Development aid includes charitable gifts from NGOs and national governments, and IGOs offering loans. It often aims to reduce different types of inequalities (e.g. income, health, education and political engagement) in developing countries. The costs and benefits of development aid need to be considered when judging whether or not development aid is largely ineffective in reducing inequalities.
Primarily, development aid is used to address economic inequalities in recipient countries but this can fail due to the mismanagement of funds by corrupt governments. The corrupt governments would rather protect the powerful elite and secure future elections, than help the poorest citizens. Despite receiving over $13 billion in aid over the last decade, Haiti remains one of the world’s poorest countries. Much of the aid money is spent on projects with American companies, which either never materialise as the money disappears or the projects fail to help the most vulnerable, such as an industrial park. The poorest people in Haiti live on less than $2 per day and it has one of the highest ratings for the Gini coefficient; this suggests that the poorest people have not benefited from all the development aid and inequalities remain wide.
Social inequalities include human rights’ violations and oppression of minorities (females, ethnic minorities, refugees). Development aid sometimes makes little impact on social inequality as the recipient country’s main focus is on economic development, rather than human development. For example, Bangladesh has been one of the top global recipients of aid over the last couple of decades, and this is reflected in the economic progress it has made. It now has a GDP growth rate of 8%, GNI/capita has increased and so has life expectancy. However, Bangladesh still has a poor human rights’ record with widespread violence and sexual abuse against women, restrictions on the freedom of expression and the poor treatment of the million refugees Bangladesh hosts from Myanmar. The considerable amount of aid that Bangladesh receives has not always trickled down to the most vulnerable; instead some of it has been lost through corruption or spent on prestige projects, like the Padma Bridge, which does little to help those with the greatest need and widens these social inequalities.
Development aid can also help to reduce gender inequality but this can be marred by the repressive policies of an authoritarian regime. Since 2010, Afghanistan regularly received a large amount of official development assistance (ODA) and had made progress towards gender equality, under a more civil government. More women were employed in governmental roles and more girls were attending school. However, after the Taliban retook control in 2021, the majority of human rights for women were revoked, reversing any progress development aid had made on gender equality.
On the other hand, development aid can also be very effective. It has been extremely successful in targeted healthcare programmes, such as vaccination programmes, resulting in the near eradication of polio and small pox. The improved diagnosis and treatment of other life-threatening diseases, like malaria, has also saved lives.
Due to international aid programmes (e.g. Nets for Life), the global death rate from malaria fell by 25% between 2000 and 2020, preventing 6.2 million deaths. When the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared an outbreak of ebola in West Africa, development aid was distributed effectively. Individual countries provided support, such as building treatment centres. Non-governmental organisations (NGOs), such as Doctors Without Borders, sent medical staff and equipment. Despite a cost of over $4 billion, the intervention slowed and stopped the spread of Ebola, resulting in the WHO declaring the region free of disease in January 2016. These health aid programmes have reduced life expectancy inequalities.
The United Nations Millennium Development Goals (2000) and the Sustainable Development Goals (2015) have also highlighted how development aid can reduce inequalities within developing countries. Over the last 23 years, progress has been made in reducing poverty, improving enrollment in primary education, achieving more gender equality and reducing other inequalities. In particular, the UN states that increasing the enrollment in primary and secondary education for all is the key to make global progress on all 17 targets. Education provides a more skilled workforce and empowers citizens with an understanding of their human rights. This can lead to economic growth and a country that is more democratic, with freedom of expression, where minority groups are treated fairly. UNICEF is supporting the SDGs through their strategy Every Child Learns, with projects such as improving access to children with disabilities and increasing technology to support remote learning for children living in remote rural areas. The UN has also championed the gender equality issue for nearly 50 years, resulting in 45% of bilateral aid specifically funding programmes targeted at gender equality. Notable successes include declining maternal mortality rates, more girls in education and more women elected to parliament in many countries. However, the progress of the SDGs has been marred by the COVID pandemic.
Overall, I disagree with the view that development aid is ineffective in reducing inequalities. With the right conditions, development aid can boost economic growth (such as Bangladesh) and human development (stopping the spread of ebola). However, it is not to say development aid is perfect; other factors do impact on the effectiveness of it, including corruption, the stance of a ruling regime (whether legitimate or not) and the emergence of a pandemic. But without development aid, would 91% of children globally have been enrolled in primary education? Would Bangladesh be re-categorised as an emerging country? Would more people have died from Ebola?
