Comments

Hi Robin, I'm all for getting rid of funding targets for 2030 but: 1. How would you see a collective target such as $50 pc working to motivate individual donors? 2. Also isn't $50 pc a pretty stingy target, even as a floor? I know it is a slight step up from current total pc funding but what can be achieved with $50 pc total assistance especially after Western beneficiaries and administration have taken their cut and the $s have been spread across every donor's favourite sector? It seems to me that stepping stone targets at 5 year intervals and individual country accountability are both necessities for an effective donor target model.

Hi It is indeed a nice read! Pictures of the bird and natural beauty of Hela could have enhanced the beauty even more. May I know how the women group came into being? Specially as they are from clashing clans. Good luck to them and you also!

We need to reform our LAWS. Our laws are precolonial and inherited from the Colonists after independence. A lot of our laws are geared towards the benefit of the colonists. We need to reform our laws to benefit Papua New Guineans on the social front, political front and the economical front. Most of our laws are outdated. when lawyers interpret these laws, they bring us back to the way things were done before independence during the colonial era and make their verdicts. We are all governed by these outdated precolonial laws and they do not reflect the constitution of our country. These outdated laws do not reflect todays situations nor the future trends in our developing nation. Our people will continue to suffer while the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. We have a Law Reform Committee but what has transpired out of this committee. The reform of laws to be geared towards the benefit of all Papua New Guineans as captured in our constitution is a mammoth task and very cumbersome. The processes that it has the run these reforms through is immense and takes years to accomplish. from the formative stage of the Law Reform Committee to this date, I personally have not heard much from this party.

I agree with these comments. However well-designed and well-tested social accountability interventions are not merely iterative but already address multiple contextual factors - they don't start from scratch. The iterations by being already embedded in large numbers of cycles of practice and learning emerge in different settings more readily (and, as Patrick Kilby will tell you social accountability is very old). Some macro factors are less amenable to this, but localised ones (like inequalities creating inequitable power relations) are addressed in designs. The evidence about interventions 'going with the grain' of culture - recognising that culture contains important enablers of public action and is not just a hindrance - can also be relevant. I suspect we underestimate the extent to which local people under conducive conditions can do their own 'social and political analysis' which despite being less sophisticated than PEA is better informed about and more finely attuned to local politics. Naturally that may deter action, but it can facilitate locally-informed iterative action by actors working collaboratively at their own pace - this can reduce risks and address fears associated with public action.This combination of considerations makes long lists of contextual factors (others being those we found evidence for in our 2014 3ie realist review for DFID) less scary for those wanting to put research into practice. For those who aren't aware of our review, Prof Patricia Rogers led the research and <a href="http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/Output/196522/" rel="nofollow">here is the link</a>. Bill

Here's another: some fabulous photos from the first Independence Day ceremonies and reflections from Caroline Tiriman <a href="http://australiaplus.com/international/2015-09-14/i-was-there-when-png-became-an-independent-nation/1491460" rel="nofollow">here</a>, and more photos <a href="https://vkpeek.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/celebrating-independence-day-38-years-ago/#sthash.2hLQegyx.dpuf" rel="nofollow">here</a>.

Robin, what do you think about the chances of an early election? Some pundits have been throwing around the possibility of Turnbull calling an election as early as November this year. It would seem that if that happens, there should really already be concerted effort from campaigners to get some kind of commitment on aid from both sides of the political fence. At the moment, it seems like we have a bipartisan commitment to not commit on aid volume, which doesn't bode that well if we do go to election soon.

Thank you to the voice inc for the job well done to keep younger generation on the right trek for the betterment of our country PNG. As we all know social problems is becoming a norm in this country and one way or the other we as the responsible citizen of this country must work together side by side to do away with it andit all starts within the family. it is without a doubt that family is the cornerstone of human existence and thus hold the key to the realization of peaceful and harmonious world, it also have the power to influence and change the society thank you and happy 40th independence celebration

Yes, I would largely agree—especially Brendan's point A. Put another way: The problem isn't so much the tyranny of context, but rather the hubris of analysis. There are limits to what can be learned through the research that precedes program design. The most important nuances of contexts only reveal themselves over the course of iterative action.

This is a valuable contribution to understanding PNG politics. I have worked from 2012-2015 at the University of Papua New Guinea and the regime over the student body during student protests as presented here is familiar to me. Yet there are a few comments to be made from my experience. First, a background in student politics is still more important than suggested here. Peter O’Neill, Ben Micah and Paul Paraka are names at the centre of PNG politics and have been student leaders. O’Neill introduced himself as an ex-student leader when he came for the first time as prime minister to the campus. Analysis of the social background of MPS showed that a substantial number had been at UPNG: 31 MPs in the 2012 parliament; 26 in the 2007 parliament. Less parliamentarians had been at UNITECH: 10 in 2012 and 8 in 2007. A common university background may therefore be important and student leadership may play a big part.. Second, protests at UPNG tend not to be directed against the university administration and no demands were made to sack the vice chancellor in the past years. The university administration avoids as much as possible a confrontation with the students. At UNITECH there was the demand for the return of a vice chancellor and that was associated with a specific accusation of big corruption. At Goroka the protests seem to be diffuse and general, but that is not the case in Lae or UPNG. Thirdly, there is a distinct difference between student protests at UPNG and at the other institutions. Student protests in UPNG tend not to deal with the administration of the university but with big political issues: the demand to the Prime minister to step down on the Paraka issuel;the UBS loan in 2014; the agreement with Australia on the asylum seekers in Manus in 2013 etc. This makes these demonstrations even more a stage to raise a political profile than is elsewhere the case. These protests cannot reasonably be solved by giving in to student demands as it would assume that students can dictate the prime minister and parliament is out of consideration. Thirdly, it is striking that the protests are not aimed at the quality of teaching, despite that they are for example frequently not turning up in class. That is surprising as this has direct consequences for their chances in life. A link between the quality of the degree and their chances on the job market is absent in the mind of students, while this link is obvious to outsiders.

The insights in this blog are of course significant, but raise also questions. First, it may be worthwhile to look more closely at situations where big spending did not produce the desired outcome. It may be that "candidates who campaigned with money and gifts performed better than those who did not", but this is too general. It may be that the popular voice can overrule the influence of money. Secondly, PNG elections have many candidates and therefore many losers. It has to be explained why many candidates spend a lot of money while the chances to win are very slim. Is this conscious gambling or being driven by a dream? Many candidates in Western Province in 2012 dreamt that they would win. (Information from Wesley Serber). Thirdly, there is a question where the money does come from. The benefits from natural resource extraction are distributed much more widely than before. The increased access to money may be a more important factor than the introduction of LPV.

It is disappointing that Australia and New Zealand have not committed more aggressive policy towards mitigating greenhouse gas production. Mitigation is absolutely necessary on a global scale. But adaptation development in the Pacific Region is very much needed in addition to mitigation commitments. So while the U.S. China and EU, big producers of GHGs, may not be PIF members they too need to have their feet held to the global warming fire in the region. President Obama's policy on climate change has been a great start but with a presidential election looming and the possibility of a climate denier getting into office President Obama must commit more to the region, now. U.S. funding for climate change in the Pacific Region is focused largely on rural projects but the areas with the greatest economic, social service and population impacts are the new rapidly growing urban environments. These are the heart and soul of Pacific development and opportunity so keeping them operational and growing is important. Big ticket items like inland roads and adequate safe health infrastructure need support from donor partners. A commitment to Pacific Island adaptation development using renewable energy sources and environmentally sound as well as safe construction from the Millennium Challenge Corporation could go a long way. But the U.S. just does not seem to be able to put one foot in front of the other in order to do anything beyond gratuitous small scale programs in an area that has big challenges to address.

Like Alan, I appreciate the attempt to find a reasonable middle ground. While I find the 'Opening the Black Box' report very helpful and useful, it does carry some danger of A) being (mis)interpreted to mean that if you 'get the analysis right' that will tell you what tool/methodology/linear intervention to adopt, and B) be so intensive as to imply that only big INGOs or contractors can successfully implement social accountability projects. Rather I the underlying message, as you and Alan note, is the importance of balancing analysis and adaptation. Two small additions from my own thinking on these can be found here, on <a href="https://politicsgovernancedevelopment.wordpress.com/2015/06/09/political-analysis-for-citizen-led-accountability/" rel="nofollow">analysis</a> and <a href="https://politicsgovernancedevelopment.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/thinking-politically-about-social-accountability/" rel="nofollow">politically-informed social accountability</a>. But at the end, I think there still needs to be more emphasis on <a href="http://www.transparency-initiative.org/news/new-think-piece-series-on-citizens-movements-and-state-accountability" rel="nofollow">building collective capacity among citizens</a>. Sorry for the excess of linkages, but this touches on a lot of ongoing conversations as well.