Comments

I agree Terence that the omnibus response has some real world aspects to it. Just suggesting that the form and environment of the question can also be important factors in shaping the response and are worthy subjects of study also.

Truly African countries have greatly depended on foreign aid, this has some impacts to their economies and I can sternly answer Jo Spratt that in many African countries you realize that budgets are made with a side thought of "we will borrow money no worry". In such a situation failure to be lent money leads to economic degradation of a state. This may cause some inflation and even increases in prices in some of basic commodities which in return may not favour many of the countries citizens. Truly foreign aid has advantages and disadvantages but the disadvantages sideline the advantages.

Regarding cost of international transfers, here is an example from my experience. One agency situated in a particular Pacific Islands country donated USD 100K equivalent in the local currency to a development project involving partners in multiple regional countries. A USD bank account was set up in the host country of the project's organisation. The 100K in the local currency of the orginiating country was transmitted as a TT to this account. What arrived was 88K. So 12% or USD 12,000 was taken by the banking system in one transaction - in a matter of seconds. That is probably not a particularly extreme case.

I think that our country is bankrupted by the O'Neill government.....I feel sorry about the future of PNG.

Thanks Garth, The Kaiser link is particularly interesting. WRT omnibus surveys, it may be the case that "fitting an aid question into an omnibus survey between one on washing powder and one on election preferences is not likely to elicit a thoughtful response or one that they would give when seriously thinking about the human connections and ethics involved in aid". However, this (thinking about matters other than aid) is actually how the average Australian lives their lives, so my mind is going to provide accurate-enough information, at least with regards to how people currently feel. cheers Terence

Given we know that people are not very knowledgable about aid, underestimate its benefits and exaggerate its costs it is not surprising that giving them more information about aid in an interview tends to result in more positive responses (eg http://kff.org/global-health-policy/poll-finding/data-note-americans-views-on-the-u-s-role-in-global-health/ and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NWtAukUPIY). In addition fitting an aid question into an omnibus survey between one on washing powder and one on election preferences is not likely to elicit a thoughtful response or one that they would give when seriously thinking about the human connections and ethics involved in aid. As each survey is different it is hard to compare, but my understanding from reading lots of these surveys is that dedicated aid surveys tend to have more pro-aid results than one-off questions.

Thanks for the comment Jeremy. I wouldn’t place too much faith in the figures that the World Bank ($1trillion for bribery) and World Economic Forum ($2.6trillion for ‘corruption’) produce – because of the nature of corruption it’s almost impossible to put any real numbers to it. And because of this there are competing numbers about how big corruption is. Having said this I agree that corruption is a key problem for developing countries. Yes, the mishmash of topics, not only within SDG 16 but across all of the SDGs, is unfortunate and means that the SDGs will likely lack focus. I guess that is what you get when trying to increase ownership among such a long list of stakeholders. Personally I’d like to see a pared down version of the SDGs that focus on what I see as more central concerns, such as education, food security, economic poverty, etc. Rather than having a separate SDG, in my world corruption would be a key strategy for achieving these core aims. Unfortunately it is too late to reshape the SDGs themselves, but it is not too late to shape the indicators – particularly those given a grey status. Hence my blog. In terms of the SDGs ‘failing’ to address corruption, that will depend on 1. the validity of the indicators and 2. how we expect to these indicators to perform over time. And discussion around the latter has not yet happened, but need will need to once the indicators have been set. Thanks again for the thoughtful comments.

Ewen Tremendously important post and one dear to my heart having been an Ambassador since 2009. Real men don't ignore, condone, excuse or commit violence against women and real men can make a difference every day, not just today. We can stand up and speak out, as you have done. We can call out wrong behaviours. We can role model for our sons; future real men. I am proud to work at a company that takes this serious. At AECOM we not only recognise White Ribbon Day, we recognise the broader and enduring issue of violence against women and have ongoing awareness and support initiatives in place. While I am also proud to be an Ambassador, I will be happier when we have gone the way of the dinosaur and violence against women no longer exists.

Thanks Elizabeth that's a very useful suggestion, I will try and find the work. Terence

Thanks Garth, Good questions: information effects (mostly aid levels but we do want to do stuff on efficacy too) are something we are working on at present, using survey experiments. I will blog more about the results when the data are fully analysed. On where the data come from -- both sets from what were in effect omnibus surveys. I'd be curious to hear why you think this would make a difference, and whether it would be for better or for worse. Thanks again. Terence

Hi, It's true, the extent of people's knowledge about aid is important, and may well shape their opinions. Nevertheless, it's useful to learn about support based on what currently know. This being the case because, realistically, the typical Australian's knowledge about most of the details of aid is probably unlikely to change substantially. That said, for campaigners, it's certainly worth learning about knowledge-effects, and this is something we're currently working on. Thanks Terence

Thank you Terence. As well as looking at the odds of different groups opposing the cuts, have you noticed any differences in results based on how the questions are framed, whether they are part of an omnibus or aid specific survey or whether information about the impacts of aid is provided to respondents?