Home » Opinion » Foreign Views
G8 gets F for failing to deliver on aid promises
By Jeffrey D. Sachs |
July 2, 2010, Friday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
IN hosting the 2010 G8 summit of major economies (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States), Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper called for an "accountability summit," to hold the G8 responsible for the promises that it made over the years.
So let's make our own account of how the G8 did. The answer, alas, is a failing grade.
The G8 this year illustrates the difference between photo-ops and serious global governance. Of all of the G8's promises over the years, the most important was made to the world's poorest people at the 2005 G8 Gleneagles Summit in Scotland.
The G8 promised that, by this year, it would increase annual development assistance to the world's poor by US$50 billion relative to 2004. Half of the increase, or US$25 billion per year, would go to Africa.
The G8 fell far short of this goal, especially with respect to Africa. Total aid went up by around US$40 billion rather than US$50 billion, and aid to Africa rose by US$10-US$15 billion per year rather than US$25 billion.
The properly measured shortfall is even greater, because the promises that were made in 2005 should be adjusted for inflation.
Re-stating those commitments in real terms, total aid should have risen by around US$60 billion, and aid to Africa should have risen by around US$30 billion.
In effect, the G8 fulfilled only half of its promise to Africa ?? roughly US$15 billion in increased aid rather than US$30 billion. Much of the overall G8 increase in aid went to Iraq and Afghanistan, as part of the US-led war effort, rather than to Africa.
Among G8 countries, only the UK is making a bold effort to increase its overall aid budget and direct a significant portion to Africa.
The G8 did not fail because of the current financial crisis. Even before the crisis, the G8 countries were not taking serious steps to meet their pledges to Africa. This year, despite a massive budget crisis, UK has heroically honored its aid commitments, showing that other countries could have done so if they had tried.
But isn't this what politicians like to do ?? smile for the cameras, and then fail to honor their promises? My own country, the US, shows the largest gap between promises and reality.
The estimated cost of hosting the G8 leaders for one and a half, followed by the G20 leaders for one and a half days, reportedly came to more than US$1 billion. This is essentially the same amount that the G8 leaders pledged to give each year to the world's poorest countries to support maternal and child health. It is absurd and troubling to spend US$1 billion on three days of meetings under any circumstances.
The G8 as a group should be brought to an end. The G20, which includes developing countries as well as rich countries, should take over. The G20 meets later this year in South Korea, a country that has emerged from poverty and hunger over the past 50 years.
South Korea understands the utter seriousness of the global development agenda, and the poorest countries' needs. Our best hope is that South Korea will succeed as the next host country, picking up where Canada has fallen far short.
(The author is professor of economics at Columbia University. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2010. www.project-syndicate.org. Shanghai Daily condensed the article.)
So let's make our own account of how the G8 did. The answer, alas, is a failing grade.
The G8 this year illustrates the difference between photo-ops and serious global governance. Of all of the G8's promises over the years, the most important was made to the world's poorest people at the 2005 G8 Gleneagles Summit in Scotland.
The G8 promised that, by this year, it would increase annual development assistance to the world's poor by US$50 billion relative to 2004. Half of the increase, or US$25 billion per year, would go to Africa.
The G8 fell far short of this goal, especially with respect to Africa. Total aid went up by around US$40 billion rather than US$50 billion, and aid to Africa rose by US$10-US$15 billion per year rather than US$25 billion.
The properly measured shortfall is even greater, because the promises that were made in 2005 should be adjusted for inflation.
Re-stating those commitments in real terms, total aid should have risen by around US$60 billion, and aid to Africa should have risen by around US$30 billion.
In effect, the G8 fulfilled only half of its promise to Africa ?? roughly US$15 billion in increased aid rather than US$30 billion. Much of the overall G8 increase in aid went to Iraq and Afghanistan, as part of the US-led war effort, rather than to Africa.
Among G8 countries, only the UK is making a bold effort to increase its overall aid budget and direct a significant portion to Africa.
The G8 did not fail because of the current financial crisis. Even before the crisis, the G8 countries were not taking serious steps to meet their pledges to Africa. This year, despite a massive budget crisis, UK has heroically honored its aid commitments, showing that other countries could have done so if they had tried.
But isn't this what politicians like to do ?? smile for the cameras, and then fail to honor their promises? My own country, the US, shows the largest gap between promises and reality.
The estimated cost of hosting the G8 leaders for one and a half, followed by the G20 leaders for one and a half days, reportedly came to more than US$1 billion. This is essentially the same amount that the G8 leaders pledged to give each year to the world's poorest countries to support maternal and child health. It is absurd and troubling to spend US$1 billion on three days of meetings under any circumstances.
The G8 as a group should be brought to an end. The G20, which includes developing countries as well as rich countries, should take over. The G20 meets later this year in South Korea, a country that has emerged from poverty and hunger over the past 50 years.
South Korea understands the utter seriousness of the global development agenda, and the poorest countries' needs. Our best hope is that South Korea will succeed as the next host country, picking up where Canada has fallen far short.
(The author is professor of economics at Columbia University. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2010. www.project-syndicate.org. Shanghai Daily condensed the article.)
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 沪ICP证：沪ICP备05050403号-1
- |
- 互联网新闻信息服务许可证：31120180004
- |
- 网络视听许可证：0909346
- |
- 广播电视节目制作许可证：沪字第354号
- |
- 增值电信业务经营许可证：沪B2-20120012
Copyright © 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
