Suchergebnisse

The article recalls the goals of Dakar-2000-conference as a benchmark for the assessment of progress within the EFA-process. The central challenges are envisaged being apparent and it is shown at what stages the need of action is most prominent till 2015 to reach the marginalized in successful and sustainable ways. (DIPF/Orig.) ; Der Beitrag erinnert an die Ziele der Konferenz von Dakar im Jahr 2000 als Bezugspunkt der Bewertung von Fortschritten im Prozess der Bildung für alle. Beschrieben werden die zentralen Herausforderungen, die anlässlich des Erscheinens des EFA-Monitoring-Reports augenscheinlich sind und es wird aufgezeigt, an welchen Stellen dringender Handlungsbedarf besteht, um die Benachteiligten erfolgreich und nachhaltig erreichen zu können. (DIPF/Orig.)

The poor cannot afford education if they are left to pay for it themselves. Furthermore, given the right political structures government schools can deliver accountability and a good quality of education.

Debates over international aid have long been marked by unlikely marriages of convenience. Critics on the right have condemned development assistance as a perversion of market forces, a waste of resources and a source of corruption. Those on the left have broadly shared this view, albeit within a framework which sees aid as one element in a broader neo‐colonial project aimed at integrating southern states into a capitalist world economy. In the past, the international consensus in favour of development assistance has survived this critique. But today dissent stands on the verge of becoming orthodoxy. For the first time in a generation, the role of aid as a form of development cooperation is under threat. Unprecedented cuts in development assistance budgets are now in prospect, especially for sub‐Saharan Africa. All of which raises the question as to whether the left should sit back and celebrate, or join new alliances to redefine the purpose and practices of aid around an agenda for poverty reduction.

External debt remains a major obstacle to human development in sub‐Saharan Africa. Repayments on that debt swallow up $10bn annually, diverting on a massive scale the resources needed for investment in health, education, employment and economic recovery. These transfers from the world's poorest region are unacceptable and should be stopped. Yet in contrast to other developing regions and even eastern Europe, existing debt‐relief measures for sub‐Saharan Africa are totally inadequate.

Launched in 1986, the General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade (GATT) Uruguay Round of international trade talks has been dominated by a confrontation between the US and the EC over farm policy reform. Both sides proclaim their commitment to devising a GATT regime which will bring an end to the anarchy in world agricultural markets, yet neither is willing to address the underlying cause of the present malaise: structural over‐production in their own farm sectors and the resulting accumulation of surpluses. The use of export subsidies to put these surpluses on to world markets caused developing countries severe trade and food security problems in the 1980s; and a Uruguay Round deal is unlikely to bring any relief. What it will do, however, is introduce new regulations which, enshrined in international trade law, will restrict the right of developing countries to manage their own food systems. Most importantly, the use of trade measures to control food imports and price support measures to promote staple food production could be severely constrained, or banned, by a 'farm superpower' GATT agreement.

Stresses moral distinctions between subsidies in the North which create market distortions and those in the South, aimed at promoting adequate food supply.