This paper examines the effect of humanitarian aid on fertility and economic growth. In an overlapping generations model, where health status in adulthood depends on health in childhood, adult agents allocate their time to work, leisure and childrearing activities. Humanitarian aid influences the probability of survival to adulthood, health in childhood, and the time that adults allocate to childrearing, giving rise to an ambiguous effect on both fertility and growth. An empirical investigation for the period 1973–2007 suggests that humanitarian aid has on average a zero effect on the rates of fertility and of per capita output growth.
Intro -- Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data -- Contents -- Preface -- Foreign Aid Reform: Issues for Congress and Policy Options( -- Summary -- Overview -- Criticisms of Current Foreign Aid Structures and Programs -- Definitions and Data Sources -- Current Aid Platforms and Funding -- Aid Platforms -- Current Funding -- Statutory Basis of Foreign Assistance -- Historical Rationales for Foreign Assistance2 -- Trends in Foreign Assistance Funding -- Historic Trends -- New Presidential Initiatives -- Regional Distribution of Aid -- Sector Distribution of Aid -- Use of Supplementals -- Issues for Congress -- Revisiting the "Why" of Foreign Aid -- Recent Foreign Aid Reform -- Proposed Levels of Foreign Assistance -- 0.7% of GNI -- Increase by 1% of Budget -- Maintain Current Aid Levels -- Policy Options -- Reform Options -- Refocus Assistance -- Change/Define Role of Defense Department -- Change Use of Multilateral Organizations -- Create a Unified Budget -- Unified Function 150 Budget or Budget Presentation -- Unified National Security Budget -- Restructuring Options -- Elevate USAID to Cabinet-Level Department -- Merge USAID into State Department -- Create Aid Agency with Increased Jurisdiction -- Improve Interagency Coordination -- Create a Coordinating Entity -- Elevate Aid Agency within NSC Structure -- Maintain Status Quo with or without Minor Modifications -- Re-write the Foreign Assistance Act -- Major Reform Report Recommendations -- HELP Commission -- Policy -- Structure -- Budget -- Senate Foreign Relations Committee -- Policy -- Structure -- Budget -- Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) -- Policy -- Structure -- Budget -- Appendix. Acronyms -- End Notes -- Foreign Aid Reform, National Strategy, and the Quadrennial Review( -- Summary -- Introduction -- Interest in ElevatingDiplomacy and Development.
Zugriffsoptionen:
Die folgenden Links führen aus den jeweiligen lokalen Bibliotheken zum Volltext:
Humanitarian aid carries with it the condition of being moral hazardous -- as do all actions of all humans. For example, aid can maintain the status quo, which can be highly detrimental to repressed groups. Humanitarian aid can help prop up a war economy & perhaps most commonly, aid allows states to pass off their responsibilities of caring for their own citizens to the aid organizations. Aid organizations & aid workers must be aware of, & must accept, the moral ambiguity & the far-reaching consequences, of their actions. However, they must not be paralyzed by their awareness of moral complexities since all human action contains a moral element & no course of action -- or inaction -- is morally neutral. 12 References. D. Knaff
International humanitarian aid is pivotal in the response to natural disasters suffered by low-and middle-income countries. While its allocation has been shown to be influenced by donors' foreign policy considerations, power relations within recipient countries have not been addressed. This paper is the first to investigate the role of regional and ethnic favoritism in the formation of humanitarian aid flows. We construct a novel dataset combining information on birth regions of political leaders and the geographic distribution of ethnic groups within countries with high numbers of natural disasters building on census (IPUMS) and Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) data. Our results suggest that the Office of US Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) disburses larger amounts of aid when natural disasters affect the birth region of the countries' leader. We find some evidence that OFDA disburses aid more frequently to leaders' birth regions as well as when regions hit by disasters are populated by politically powerful or discriminated ethnicities. Our findings imply that humanitarian aid is not given for humanitarian reasons alone, but also serves elite interests within recipient countries.
Significance Threats to human livelihoods resulting from natural hazards are increasing due to climate change. Climate-related disasters such as floods, storms, and droughts have destroyed shelter, reduced crop yields, harmed livestock, and fueled conflict, especially in developing countries. The key finding is that UN aid in the aftermath of climate-related disasters is largely driven by humanitarian need. The UN seems able to fend off donor states’ strategic interest and allocate more aid after disasters where hazard severity is greater and need is more pressing. Based on this finding, we argue that the UN lives up to its stated principles of neutrality, impartiality, and independence in disaster aid, corroborating the legitimacy of the UN in allocating disaster aid.
Einstellungen und Verhalten der Niederländer gegenüber Entwicklungsländern und Entwicklungshilfe.
Themen: Wahrnehmung der Situation und der Probleme der Entwicklungsländer; Beurteilung der Effizienz verschiedener Maßnahmen zur Entwicklungshilfe; Informiertheit über Entwicklungshilfeaktionen und Informationsquellen der Befragten zu diesem Themenkreis; eigene Teilnahme an Entwicklungshilfeaktionen.
Few issues in global politics are as contentious as foreign aid – how much rich countries should give, in what ways, to whom. For years, it has been a commonplace that U.S. policies are stingy. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) routinely ranks the United States far behind its industrialized peers in official development assistance (ODA), measured as a percentage of gross national income (GNI). An endless parade of critics has implored the government to do more; some suggest that the Bush Administration's support for the Monterrey Consensus, which sets a goal of increasing assistance to 0.7% of GNI, commits it to do more. Against these allegations of miserliness, executive officials and certain sympathetic scholars have begun to argue that the published statistics are misleading because they fail to account for individual and corporate philanthropy. What the OECD misses, this argument runs, is the exceptional extent of Americans' private generosity.
Since 2015, the 'refugee crisis' in Greece has turned the Eastern Mediterranean migration route into one of the main entry points to Europe. In response, a grassroots solidarity movement has emerged in the Aegean islands that has become instrumental for boat rescue at sea, and for camp service provision. These local and international volunteers, as well as refugees, identify as 'New Humanitarians'. This paper presents the emic aspects of the 'New Humanitarians', and focuses on vernacular actors and how they challenge the humanitarian landscape in Greece by examining their principles, practices, and discourse. A key finding is that the 'New Humanitarian' principles that they model revisit the existing ones—i.e. solidarity, hospitality, equality, and agency. Other findings show that the 'New Humanitarians' are reproducing governing technologies imposed by the government and other agencies. They do so while trying to contest mainstream humanitarianism and pleading for much-needed change in the European border regime and refugee management systems.
The so-called "refugee crisis" in Lesvos, Greece provides a poignant example of situated, local suffering that has called for the coordination of global resources to provide relief. Some of the first to respond were local and international Citizen Initiatives for Global Solidarity (CIGS). While a growing role for CIGS has been interpreted as a call for more global involvement, arguments for the increased localization of relief efforts suggest the need for aid agents to maintain a reflexive awareness of the potential for an influx of outside assistance to disempower those most affected. We argue that barriers to implementing the localization of humanitarian aid can be better understood by positioning this localization alongside theories of global solidarity. This paper pairs theoretical contributions from the fields of moral and political philosophy with an analysis of interview material gathered in Lesvos between 2015 and 2019. Our goal is to use narratives of conflicting interests in Lesvos to explore conceptual distinctions concerning solidarity and emphasize the importance of the localization of global solidarity in humanitarian aid. We conclude that while global solidarity represents a demanding effort to identify with distant others and provide aid, the intensity and transformative potential of the process of "making the crisis one's own" through solidary engagement can overshadow the importance of local ownership of crisis management.
The article analyzes the Canadian foreign aid relationship with Asia; focusing primarily on the motivations and reasons why the government should rethink the utilization of scarce resources to promote wellbeing and strategic ties. The author then presents the argument, that despite the traditional leveraging of its foreign aid relations, Canada has been slow in responding to the dramatic changes and shifts in Asia and has not effectively recalibrated such programs. Utilizing the writing of Carol Lancaster, the author explains the instrument role of foreign aid and main purposes: diplomatic, developmental, humanitarian relief, commercial, and less prominently, cultural. The article then examines concerning reasons behind such utilization; explains the Asian aid policy in effect through the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and the International Development Research Center (IDRC); and discusses the policy shift, levels attained, projects, and the role and influence of multi and bilateral aid agencies in the region. Then the article addresses the diversions from this coherent strategy of the CIDA; exemplifies implementation and administering through humanitarian relief efforts in the Indian Ocean nations and Afghanistan; discusses the present state of bilateral and multilateral aid funding, and cites developmental interests in areas such as Indonesia, and Vietnam. The article also looks at bureaucratic organizational constraints and other problems factored in the aid process, discussing programming policy, programming, projects, and personnel hierarchy. Finally, the author opines on the future of aid and the uncertainty and purpose of the strategy behind implementing such programs. Adapted from the source document.
Few issues in global politics are as contentious as foreign aid – how much rich countries should give, in what ways, to whom. For years, it has been a commonplace that U.S. policies are stingy. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) routinely ranks the United States far behind its industrialized peers in official development assistance (ODA), measured as a percentage of gross national income (GNI). An endless parade of critics has implored the government to do more; some suggest that the Bush Administration's support for the Monterrey Consensus, which sets a goal of increasing assistance to 0.7% of GNI, commits it to do more. Against these allegations of miserliness, executive officials and certain sympathetic scholars have begun to argue that the published statistics are misleading because they fail to account for individual and corporate philanthropy. What the OECD misses, this argument runs, is the exceptional extent of Americans' private generosity. What both sides of the debate have missed, this Article proposes, is not the role of the private sector in generating foreign aid but the role of tax expenditures in subsidizing it. Better known as tax breaks or loopholes, tax expenditures are deviations from the normal tax structure "designed to favor a particular industry, activity, or class of persons." They take the form of deductions, exemptions, exclusions, deferrals, credits, or preferential rates. Economically, these "expenditures" may be seen as equivalent to direct government outlays: if U.S. taxpayers saved $70 billion last year from, say, the mortgage interest deduction, the government therefore gave a $70 billion (implicit) subsidy to homeownership. Stanley Surrey pioneered the theory of tax expenditures in the late 1960s, and the concept is now widely, though not universally, credited. Since 1974, Congress has required the annual publication of a tax expenditure budget. Although not immediately evident from the budget data, in recent years a growing amount of expenditure has gone toward foreign aid. The reason lies in America's tax treatment of nonprofit organizations. Whenever U.S. charities and foundations spend money overseas – as they have increasingly been doing – some portion of this spending can be attributed to the support they receive from numerous state and federal tax privileges. More controversially, several other domestic tax expenditures, such as the deferral granted to foreign source active business income, might also be seen as providing foreign assistance. Unlike traditional ODA, these tax expenditure funds are privately organized and distributed, yet unlike voluntary transfers they are paid for by the public fisc. This is not private aid; it is privatized aid. The basic, descriptive goal of this Article is to show, in Parts I and II, how nonprofit tax policies have shaped the content of American aid. This analysis implies that the definition of ODA should be revised, as the next Part explains. The broader goal is to begin to connect these insights, in the balance of Part III, with the literatures on tax expenditures and international development – and, in so doing, to illuminate some attractive and unattractive features of using tax expenditures in the foreign aid context. While my focus throughout is on the United States, the central argument can be generalized to any country with broadly analogous international tax policies.
