Suchergebnisse

"Foreign Aid" published on by Oxford University Press.

Intro -- FOREIGN AID: ANALYSES OF EFFICIENCY, EFFECTIVENESS AND DONOR COORDINATION -- FOREIGN AID: ANALYSES OF EFFICIENCY, EFFECTIVENESS AND DONOR COORDINATION -- CONTENTS -- PREFACE -- Chapter 1 DOES FOREIGN AID WORK? EFFORTS TO EVALUATE U.S. FOREIGN ASSISTANCE -- SUMMARY -- INTRODUCTION -- DOES AID WORK? A BRIEF SUMMARY -- IMPACT AND PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS -- HISTORY OF U.S. FOREIGN ASSISTANCE EVALUATION -- EVALUATION CHALLENGES -- Mixed Objective -- Funding and Personnel Constraints -- Emphasis on Accountability of Funds -- Methodological Challenges -- Compressed Timelines -- Country Ownership and Donor Coordination -- Security -- Agency and Personal Incentives -- APPLYING EVALUATION FINDINGS TO POLICY -- CURRENT AGENCY EVALUATION POLICIES -- ISSUES FOR CONGRESS -- Reform Authorization Legislation -- Appropriations for Enhanced Evaluation -- Impact of Evidence Based Approach on Congressional Priorities -- CONCLUSION -- APPENDIX A. SELECT ASPECTS OF CURRENT USAID, STATE DEPARTMENT, AND MCC EVALUATION POLICIES -- End Notes -- Chapter 2 FOREIGN AID: INTERNATIONAL DONOR COORDINATION OF DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE -- SUMMARY -- INTRODUCTION -- OVERVIEW OF OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE -- WHY COORDINATE? -- WHY NOT COORDINATE? -- INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR DONOR COORDINATION -- WPAE High Level Forums -- Rome High Level Forum on Donor Harmonization -- Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness -- Accra Agenda for Action -- Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation -- The Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation -- IMPLEMENTING DONOR COORDINATION -- Global Mechanisms -- Use of Multilateral Organizations -- Joint Assistance Strategies -- Sector-Wide Approaches (SWAps) -- Data Sharing -- U.S.-Specific Mechanisms for Donor Coordination -- USAID Guidance -- USAID Coordination Officers -- Coordinators of Cross-Cutting Initiatives

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.

Demographie: Alter; Geschlecht; Familienstand; Konfession;
Schulbildung; Einkommen; Mitgliedschaft.

Consequences of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings law; challenges for the new administration.

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.

Foreign aid has connected China and the international community through many channels, and created new types of strong partnerships throughout the world. As a recipient country, China and donors have engaged in an unprecedentedly deep level of cooperation on development-related issues. China's development experience has resulted in key changes to the relationships and partnerships between China and donors, from receiving foreign aid to entering into development cooperation. China has provided valuable experiences for other developing countries, experiences that are all the more relevant because they have revealed key factors at work in developing recipient countries. This has also led China to form closer cooperative relationships with other developing countries with regard to development issues. In short, foreign aid has changed China

Argues that goals of US diplomacy and foreign assistance should be to help preserve peace, address challenges of globalization, and improve quality of life for the poor and disadvantaged.