Registered user login:

What really makes a difference

Michela Wrong

Published 04 June 2007

I like to think I've developed an instinctive humbug detector

As a journalist, you spend a lot of time listening to other people articulate their ideas. I like to think I've developed an instinctive humbug detector, an internal editing machine that kicks in even when the conscious mind isn't fully engaged. I may set out, pen poised over notebook, determined to capture and record. But if the speaker's arguments don't come up to scratch I'll always end up staring at a blank piece of paper.

That instinct was certainly put to the test by the Reith Lectures, delivered this year by Professor Jeffrey Sachs, guru to concerned pop stars, UN special adviser and one of the inspirations behind the Make Poverty History campaign. Already popular with New Labour, Sachs has also been publicly embraced by George Osborne. Given Sachs's cross-party approval, I was keen to hear his latest thoughts on globalisation, climate change and world poverty.

Yet as soon as his sonorous voice began rolling across the room my hand reached, like a thing possessed, for the radio's "off" button. Come the repeat, the same thing happened. The BBC's playback function was no better - I'd sit down to listen, then find myself wandering out of earshot. The only way of forcing myself to ingest the Reith Lectures, I discovered, was to print the bloody things out and read them.

There was a lot here I was already familiar with from his The End of Poverty. Sachs believes that Africa's salvation is ours to bestow. It's that simple. We have the know-how; all we need is a huge hike in western aid. History-lite, politics-free, unashamedly populist, his vision of the world is utterly appealing. It just doesn't happen to bear any relation to the world I live in. I guess that's why I find him so tiresome.

Sachs is in the air again this week, thanks to the G8 summit. Two years after Gleneagles, only Japan and the UK look set to meet their commitments to double aid to Africa by 2010. Some might regard this generalised backtracking as a reflection of the utopianism that lay behind the original promises. Not the aid agencies involved in Make Poverty History. They want delivery, not re-evaluation.

Well, here is my suggestion for the well-meaning souls preparing to heed the campaigners' call. This year, before donning a plastic wristband and heading for the agreed march route, why not buy a copy of The Bottom Billion, just published by Professor Paul Collier? It's such an accessible read, you could get through a chunk of it while on the march. If you're really interested in world poverty, you won't be able to put it down. It'll make you realise that fretting over which G8 signatories will hit the 0.7 per cent of GDP mark is the modern equivalent of obsessing over the sex of angels.

Professor of economics at Oxford and a former World Bank director, Collier has spent three decades studying poverty. Where Sachs resorts to emotional rhetoric, Collier examines what the statistics show about the factors keeping a billion people mired in abject poverty.

He comes up with some surprising conclusions, many of which will raise hackles in the development world. Aid, he argues, just isn't that important. It has been hugely oversold, both by those who think it works miracles and by those who blame it for Africa's woes. It has probably added just one percentage point to the annual growth rates of the poorest countries in the past 30 years - hardly the economic Viagra that Sachs suggests. What's more, aid is subject to the law of diminishing returns: "As you keep on increasing aid, you get less and less bang for your buck."

Even before Gleneagles, many African countries had nearly reached their absorptive limits. The doubling of aid touted by campaigners begins to look like a distraction.

Teasing out what actually does make a difference, Collier challenges a host of oft-repeated aid mantras: that project aid is less effective than direct budget support (it's the other way round); that flooding a traumatised country with expatriate consultants is a bad thing (they're exactly what's needed in a country whose educated class has moved abroad); that military interventions are a disastrous waste of money (there are few more cost-effective ways of stabilising entire regions); that democratic elections are desirable in countries emerging from conflict (the risk of new violence soars post-poll).

He is particularly damning when it comes to trade policy, a topic on which he believes aid agencies show either horrific cynicism ("it's too complicated to summarise in a slogan the stupid public will understand") or criminal ignorance. What Africa needs is special protection for its exports to western markets. What it gets is NGOs campaigning for the maintenance of African trade barriers that allow parasitic domestic businesses, preserves of the corrupt elite, to keep ripping off the public.

What Collier makes clear, in beguilingly readable form, is that Making Poverty History is difficult, and that the public, if it wants to engage with the issues, needs to raise its intellectual game. In the run-up to the G8 summit, anyone who tells you different is either a fool, or treating you as one. Listen to your own critical voice.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • NowPublic
  • Reddit

7 comments from readers

ikotubo
31 May 2007 at 11:18

I would even go further and suggest that access to Western markets has never been a problem: The multilateral trading regime allows for preferential trading arrangements between rich and poor countries, based essentially on bilateral terms - in effect, a derogation from its rules. The Americans, for example, have the African Growth and Opportunity Act regime, while the EU has the Everything But Arms initiative - both of which allow imports from the poorest African countries tariff-free. These, to be sure, are not without a few strings. The EU scheme, for example, excludes bananas, rice and sugar (the exclusions to be phased out gradually), while the American regime imposes certain conditions, including respect for human rights. To date, very few African countries have been able to utilize any of these preferential regimes to any meaningful degree.

The problem, therefore, has nothing to do with market access; it has everything to do with a basic inability to trade - not altogether surprising if you have no functioning State institutions or infrastructure due to unprecedented levels of corruption and systematic misrule.

wrongheaded
01 June 2007 at 16:04

Well,

There she goes again. Educated illiterate or just simply evil or perhaps even RACIO-FACIST. I have never come across this woman say anything positive about AFRICA yet make a living writing about Africa.

Are you MI6 by any chance? Part of the propaganda machine to constantly project Africa in a negative light; thus discourage FDI's(Foreign direct Investment) in Africa? That would mean all the monies flowing to the CITY OF “THEFT” LONDON.

What about our subsidising EU farmers to the tune of £1BILLION everyday! Not every year but everyday? What about the imposition of MAFIA tax whenever Africans add-value to their raw materials for export to the "PARASITIC ECONOMIES" WEST.

The FT (FINANCIAL TIMES) reckons every COW in Europe can fly FIRST CLASS round the WORLD on British Airways.

What would the west "Parasitic Economies" do without AFRICA? We'll starve and please start being honest. AID is nothing more than an instrument (bribe) of creating "markets" for WESTERN (oh sorry - THE PARASITIC ECONOMIES). Serves to build capacity for our local business - exports. Yes we are Knowledge Rich but Resource Poor hence the need to constantly subjugate, interfere, Murder, Rape, enslave, invade, plunder ... need I gone on?

We are the parasites not the local businessmen as you put it. Shame on you! How do you ever go to sleep at night?

What AFRICA needs is less interference from the likes of Michela Wrong and the Gangsters and Economic Terrorists masquerading as Blue Chip and Corporate Entities backed up with MILITARY AND DIPLOMATIC cover; using FACELESS organisations such as the UN, IMF, WORLD BANK.

The World is SICK big time! The triangular trade is still going on in all but name. Nothing is changed from the trans-Atlantic slave trade. Its still the same business model. What is changed is from trading in humans to RAW MATERIALS.

Wake up and smell the COFFEE…For every pound that we give out as AID we take back 5 from AFRICA. Now do the math and see who depends on whom.. In fact they are the ones giving us AID in real terms.

ikotubo
02 June 2007 at 13:52

TO wrongheaded: I'm not sure my intervention is helpful, but cannot ignore the quality of your response to Michaela Wrong's post. Astonishingly, you've described her (amongst other things) as "evil" and "racio-facist" - whatever these ever meant. First, this kind of attack is totally unncecessary; you could still have made your point/s (assuming you had any) without such an irrational outburst.

Secondly (and even more importantly), she happens to be more knowledgeable about Africa (which also happens to be my continent) than most other so-called "Africa experts," and is self-evidently more knowledgeable than you could ever hope to be. The quality of your contribution is therefore quite embarrassing.

dumsmure
06 June 2007 at 13:45

I agree with ikotubo. Michaela Wrong is excellent on Africa and sees through both African and western delusions about the continent. She doesn't portray Africa in a 'negative light' as wrongheaded suggests. She just portrays it realistically, which is vital if progress is to be made.

Admin
12 June 2007 at 13:51

From Letters to the Editor...

Michela Wrong is to be congratulated on her promotion of Paul Collier’s analysis in ‘The Bottom Billion.’ Unusually, Niall Ferguson expressed an equal enthusiasm in the Sunday Telegraph on the 3rd June. What makes Collier’s analysis particularly refreshing is his own service as a World Bank insider. Amy Chua, Ferguson’s colleague at Harvard, produced equally innovative thinking in ‘World on Fire.’ Sadly no such radical voices seem likely to arise from within Blair’s creation - the Department for International Development. Its regime, established initially under Clare Short, has always been best at propagating and enforcing dogma. DFID’s performance still remains limited by its failure either to seek or to respond to the kind of incisive analysis that Collier and Chua represent.

Howard Horsley

Admin
12 June 2007 at 14:11

From Letters to the Editor...

Michela Wrong's claim that the Gleneagles G8 pledges of 2005 are "utopianism" reflects the small minded world that journalists and polticians tend to live in. The fact remains that the amounts of cash involved are tiny on a global scale, and at any rate are dwarfed by the historical and present-day plunder of the developing world by the developed world.

It is in the interests of government to paint the Millennium Development Goals as some kind of herculean project, but they are a very basic commitment to alleviate the very worse kind of poverty, just enough to stop people literally dying of hunger.

Utopia looks a lot better than that!

Tom Allen

isyss
29 July 2007 at 15:30

Thank you so much for your website. I lucked into it. I was struck by the comment.."the stupid public"... I would like to address that comment. I am a retired 62 yr. old woman who worked for UAL for 40 yrs. which qualifies me for a mere observation. I have been an active participant since my 20's in attempting to raise the standards of women workers.

I have availed myself of enmerous opportunities to keep informed. My daughter's major at University was International Relations. I read every book and studied along with her.

I do not consider myself the "stupid public".

Having seen corruption, first hand, as various personnel who servicsed our airplanes in miriad countries. I believe the primary reason no aid, no amount of NGO' s or the World Bank will ever solve poverty is corruption, starting with the US government.

We buy and sell arms, fortify despot governments, qualify aid, (re: only abstinence programs in Africa) and refuse to asist in Iraq workers who have

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

About the writer

Michela Wrong has spent 13 years reporting on the African continent and is the author of two non-fiction books, "In the Footsteps of Mr Kurtz," about the Congolese dictator Mobutu, and "I didn't do it for you", about the Red Sea nation of Eritrea.

Read More

Vote!

Should world leaders be forced to stay at the table until their plates are clean?

Win Manu Chao
Albums!

Plus limited edition shirts and vinyl

Enter online