EN - FR - Yükselen Afrika ve Türkiye / Rising Africa and Turkey 3
EN - FR - Yükselen Afrika ve Türkiye / Rising Africa and Turkey 3 EN - FR - Yükselen Afrika ve Türkiye / Rising Africa and Turkey 3
212 Yükselen Afrika ve Türkiye / Rising Africa and Turkeyexert its best efforts to reach a minimum net amount of 0.7 percent of its grossnational product at market prices by middle of the decade.” (UN 1970 paragraph43).The first deadline passed as ten years after the declared target ODAreached 0.35 percent in 1980 and by 1990 ODA was at 0.34% of donor GNP.It then fell to 0.23% in 2002, when the same year the 0.7% target was reconfirmedby all countries in the Monterrey Consensus (OECD 2004). Parties tothe Consensus committed to reversing the trends in declining ODA, when theEuropean Union had agreed to an average of 0.39% of gross national income(GNI) by 2006 (from 0.33%). And OECD-DAC members had increased theirODA to developing countries by 4.8% in real terms from 2001 to 2002, to $57billion, equal to 0.23% of their combined GNI. According to OECD estimates,fulfilling the promises of Monterrey would raise ODA in real terms by 31%(about $16 Billion) and bring the ODA.-to-GNI ratio to 0.26% by 2006, stillwell below the 0.33% consistently achieved until 1992. The commitment ofattaining the long-established target of 0.7% of GNI appears to be a long waytowards fulfillment.So far only five countries have met and surpassed the 0.7% target:Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden. In the pasttwo years, however, six other countries have committed themselves to specifictimetables to achieving the target before 2015: Belgium, Finland, France,Ireland, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Thus nearly half of the membershipof OECD’s Development Assistance Committee has now set a firm timetablefor reaching 0.7% by 2015, (the target date for achieving the MillenniumDevelopment Goals).Box 1. Assessing donor contributions to development effectiveness:A multidimensional approachWhen trying to determine the proper role for donor countries in enhancingdevelopment effectiveness, it is critical to consider a wide array of donorpolicies and practices. Disbursements of official development assistance(ODA) are very important instruments. Trade, environment, investment anddebt relief policies and practices are additional ways for donor countries toinfluence development effectiveness in poor countries. Evaluations of thedevelopment friendliness of donor policies and practices that explicitly takethese additional variables into account will therefore paint a very different picturefrom evaluations that merely consider amounts of aid disbursed.
The Role and Effeciency of Foreign Aid in Africa’s Development 213Promoting this need for a more comprehensive appraisal of donor policiesand practices, the Center for Global Development, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, analyzed the practices and policies of 21 donor countries inofficial development assistance, trade, the environment, investment, migrationand peacekeeping to promote development. Underlying the findings (criticizedbecause of the weighting system used for constructing the index) hasbeen the belief that taking these additional variables into account provides adifferent picture of which donors are most committed to development.For example, the two countries providing the highest absolute amount offoreign aid to the developing world are the United States and Japan. By thiscriterion alone these tow countries could be said to be doing the most to promotedevelopment (though both look less generous when ODA is viewed as apercentage of their gross national income). But when the additional policyvariables are included in the analysis, the ranking of countries changed considerably;the Netherlands, Denmark and Portugal were regarded as the topthree countries committed to development.Source: Millenium Project: Investing in Development adopted fromCenter for Global Development, 2003, “Ranking the Rich”, Foreign PolicyMay/June.According to World Bank statistics, the flow of ODA in 2001 was equalto 8.1% of gross national income in the least developed countries and 2.3% inother low-income countries. Developed countries’ political, economic andstrategic interests in aid allocation continue to be issues of intense dialogueand debate. According to the UNDP’s Development Effectiveness Report2003, it is quoted that a World Bank study found that non-economic factors,such as colonial ties, the likelihood of voting with donor countries in theUnited Nations and special relationships, such as that between Egypt and theUnited States, have far greater bearing on aid allocation than do poverty, economicpolicies or political openness. But there is evidence that suggest that aidallocations are shifting more towards development, and a small upward trendin the last few years has been acknowledged particularly ODA to the leastdeveloped countries, low income and Sub-Saharan Africa. See table below
- Page 53 and 54: Yeni Türk-Afrika Ekonomik ‹liflk
- Page 55 and 56: Yeni Türk-Afrika Ekonomik ‹liflk
- Page 57 and 58: Yeni Türk-Afrika Ekonomik ‹liflk
- Page 59 and 60: Yeni Türk-Afrika Ekonomik ‹liflk
- Page 61 and 62: The New Turkish - African Economic
- Page 63 and 64: The New Turkish-African Economic Re
- Page 65 and 66: The New Turkish-African Economic Re
- Page 67 and 68: The New Turkish-African Economic Re
- Page 69 and 70: The New Turkish-African Economic Re
- Page 71 and 72: The New Turkish-African Economic Re
- Page 73 and 74: The New Turkish-African Economic Re
- Page 75 and 76: The New Turkish-African Economic Re
- Page 77 and 78: The New Turkish-African Economic Re
- Page 79 and 80: The New Turkish-African Economic Re
- Page 81 and 82: Afrika’n›n Kalk›nmas›nda D
- Page 83 and 84: Afrika’n›n Kalk›nmas›nda D
- Page 85 and 86: Afrika’n›n Kalk›nmas›nda D
- Page 87 and 88: Afrika’n›n Kalk›nmas›nda D
- Page 89 and 90: Afrika’n›n Kalk›nmas›nda D
- Page 91 and 92: Afrika’n›n Kalk›nmas›nda D
- Page 93 and 94: Afrika’n›n Kalk›nmas›nda D
- Page 95 and 96: Afrika’n›n Kalk›nmas›nda D
- Page 97 and 98: The Role and Effeciency of Foreign
- Page 99 and 100: The Role and Effeciency of Foreign
- Page 101 and 102: The Role and Effeciency of Foreign
- Page 103: The Role and Effeciency of Foreign
- Page 107 and 108: The Role and Effeciency of Foreign
- Page 109 and 110: The Role and Effeciency of Foreign
- Page 111 and 112: The Role and Effeciency of Foreign
- Page 113 and 114: D›fl Yard›m ve Afrika’n›n K
- Page 115 and 116: D›fl Yard›m ve Afrika’n›n K
- Page 117 and 118: D›fl Yard›m ve Afrika’n›n K
- Page 119 and 120: D›fl Yard›m ve Afrika’n›n K
- Page 121 and 122: D›fl Yard›m ve Afrika’n›n K
- Page 123 and 124: D›fl Yard›m ve Afrika’n›n K
- Page 125 and 126: D›fl Yard›m ve Afrika’n›n K
- Page 127 and 128: D›fl Yard›m ve Afrika’n›n K
- Page 129 and 130: D›fl Yard›m ve Afrika’n›n K
- Page 131 and 132: D›fl Yard›m ve Afrika’n›n K
- Page 133 and 134: D›fl Yard›m ve Afrika’n›n K
- Page 135 and 136: Foreign Aid and Africa’s Developm
- Page 137 and 138: Foreign Aid and Africa’s Developm
- Page 139 and 140: Foreign Aid and Africa’s Developm
- Page 141 and 142: Foreign Aid and Africa’s Developm
- Page 143 and 144: Foreign Aid and Africa’s Developm
- Page 145 and 146: Foreign Aid and Africa’s Developm
- Page 147 and 148: Foreign Aid and Africa’s Developm
- Page 149 and 150: Foreign Aid and Africa’s Developm
- Page 151 and 152: Foreign Aid and Africa’s Developm
- Page 153 and 154: Foreign Aid and Africa’s Developm
The Role <strong>and</strong> Effeciency of Foreign Aid in <strong>Africa</strong>’s De<strong>ve</strong>lopment 213Promoting this need for a more comprehensi<strong>ve</strong> appraisal of donor policies<strong>and</strong> practices, the Center for Global De<strong>ve</strong>lopment, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank, analyzed the practices <strong>and</strong> policies of 21 donor countries inofficial de<strong>ve</strong>lopment assistance, trade, the environment, in<strong>ve</strong>stment, migration<strong>and</strong> peacekeeping to promote de<strong>ve</strong>lopment. Underlying the findings (criticizedbecause of the weighting system used for constructing the index) hasbeen the belief that taking these additional variables into account provides adifferent picture of which donors are most committed to de<strong>ve</strong>lopment.For example, the two countries providing the highest absolute amount offoreign aid to the de<strong>ve</strong>loping world are the United States <strong>and</strong> Japan. By thiscriterion alone these tow countries could be said to be doing the most to promotede<strong>ve</strong>lopment (though both look less generous when ODA is viewed as apercentage of their gross national income). But when the additional policyvariables are included in the analysis, the ranking of countries changed considerably;the Netherl<strong>and</strong>s, Denmark <strong>and</strong> Portugal were regarded as the topthree countries committed to de<strong>ve</strong>lopment.Source: Millenium Project: In<strong>ve</strong>sting in De<strong>ve</strong>lopment adopted fromCenter for Global De<strong>ve</strong>lopment, 2003, “Ranking the Rich”, Foreign PolicyMay/June.According to World Bank statistics, the flow of ODA in 2001 was equalto 8.1% of gross national income in the least de<strong>ve</strong>loped countries <strong>and</strong> 2.3% inother low-income countries. De<strong>ve</strong>loped countries’ political, economic <strong>and</strong>strategic interests in aid allocation continue to be issues of intense dialogue<strong>and</strong> debate. According to the UNDP’s De<strong>ve</strong>lopment Effecti<strong>ve</strong>ness Report2003, it is quoted that a World Bank study found that non-economic factors,such as colonial ties, the likelihood of voting with donor countries in theUnited Nations <strong>and</strong> special relationships, such as that between Egypt <strong>and</strong> theUnited States, ha<strong>ve</strong> far greater bearing on aid allocation than do po<strong>ve</strong>rty, economicpolicies or political openness. But there is evidence that suggest that aidallocations are shifting more towards de<strong>ve</strong>lopment, <strong>and</strong> a small upward trendin the last few years has been acknowledged particularly ODA to the leastde<strong>ve</strong>loped countries, low income <strong>and</strong> Sub-Saharan <strong>Africa</strong>. See table below
Change language