On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 02:35:55AM -0400, Peter Burgess wrote: > Development should be about replicating success and ensuring that the > scarce resources are used most wisely to achieve the greatest results. > But that rarely happens. There is little "knowledge" used in the > management of development and the allocation of scarce resources. > Instead scarce resources are squandered over and over again starting > things over instead of optimising what one might call a "continuum" of > development activities. > > This is not a question of "capacity" in the SOUTH, or of "corruption" in > the SOUTH. This is a creation of the ODA community and the NORTH. It > optimises (maximises) the use of consultants from the NORTH while > reducing the resources available to the SOUTH.
Great points that you are making. What you call development here is what I call controlled underdevelopment. Just a way to pretend as if things are changing while ensuring that they stay the same. Another point missed often is that those who are assigned to work in developing countries or those who are interested all too often are the less abled of the developed world. The real geniuses go into cancer research and stuff like that and leave the developed world wide open to those less abled. So the consultants are not even smart enough in the first place and right from square one, the resources are squandered. Of course, they make sure that they don't deal with the private sector, only with government and NGOs and that makes things worse. Few sane people in there, some trying very hard to make a difference, but the dead weight of the charlatans drags it all down and ensures that the quacks remain with a secure job. > But the SOUTH also has to figure out how to get what it needs without > being totally dependent on "gifts" from the NORTH. The SOUTH should be > able to make the case for getting help because it is doing great things > with the resource help, and is making measurable progress. With the > information easily available, it is not at all clear that "gifts" are > doing as much good as they could ....... and it should be clear ..... > not necessarily before the "gifts" are given, but certainly afterwards. Tied aid should be abolished. If they want to tie things then they should make it a grant. South is making great progress. Consider all infrastructure before and after independence for a country like Ghana. A lot of stuff was largely non existent before independence. If we could build all we have in such a short time, what more could have been achieved if things started earlier ? Or if world markets for commodities have not been relentlessly driving down prices and terms of trade were actually fair. ---------------------------------------------------------- Guido Sohne [EMAIL PROTECTED] At Large http://sohne.net ---------------------------------------------------------- When it's dark enough you can see the stars. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson ---------------------------------------------------------- ------------ ***GKD is solely supported by EDC, a Non-Profit Organization*** To post a message, send it to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: <http://www.edc.org/GLG/gkd/>
