Comments

Thanks Matt for this contribution which I think is a very cogent analysis. I think that there is a particular point to be made about Goal 16, which specifically addresses issues relating to governance, an aspect of development that was noticeably absent from the MDGs. In the context of Pacific development challenges, it is good to see it here. I agree that the importance of these goals in the Pacific is largely one of normative symbolism and certainly they are highly unlikely to feature in national political discourse, or at least that part of it that is intended for domestic audiences. However, I am a little less sanguine about the impact on policy makers in the region. No doubt discussions with development partners (or the OECD-DAC ones anyway) will be expected to be peppered with appropriate references to goals/targets/outputs, etc as will proposals for projects, programmes and so on. Mastering the language and figuring out how to 'play the game' will be time consuming and possibly frustrating. PS - I suppose you could have entitled your post 'Islands in the Stream' but overall I'm very glad you didn't

This debate is over simplified. Those who work in the field will acknowledge that in practice "advising" and being "in line" are not so different. Out of respect for national sovereignty, "advisers" have until recently been encouraged to defer ultimate decision making to their national counterparts: it does not mean that advisers don't get their "hands dirty". To be "in line" may bring with it more formal authority but the authority can be undermined if a foreigner is unable to maintain the respect of colleagues or makes too many unpopular decisions. Personally I have worked in both capacities and have found that "in line" my authority could be subverted just as easily as my powers of persuasion as an adviser. Also, donors expect the people that they pay to show them loyalty: this potentially creates a conflict of interest because contractually an "in line" foreigner has a primary duty towards the Government of PNG. I'm not arguing against "in line" - just trying to dispel yet another "silver bullet" moment in aid policy.

It is understandable that Humanitarian assistance is not a component of development policy but its strategic importance in development policy can not be ruled out, Rebecca. The three points you have raised are very important in the process of humanitarian assistance. The Channel of Disbursement, Untapped Sources and Pre-emptive Measures to prevent/predict natural and human-made disasters. All these three steps are important in case of humanitarian assistance. Moreover, sometimes national governments are very sensitive while accepting the humanitarian assistance and its disbursement process and, thus do not allow the international assistance and its mechanisms. The human-made disasters can certainly be prevented, if the governments and systems works wisely. It is also obvious and you have rightly pointed out that needs of humanitarian assistance far exceeds the capacity of donors and therefore it is imperative to encourage involvement of local communities in order to inculcate 'resilience' in the society to face any disaster. The vulnerable sections like children and women must be paid special attention in case of any disaster. I think it is important to sensitise the ruling elite, particularly in the developing countries, to ensure the enforcement of global standards of efficient utilisation of humanitarian assistance and their dependence on developed world must be reduced through 'resilience' generating measures. Finally, should I suggest that there must be a critique and evaluation of the existing approaches and perspectives of humanitarian assistance in order to search for more innovative approach ?

Thanks Rebecca, an excellent article with very significant points. I would highlight the point you make about leakage of resources to overheads and subcontracting, which in all forms of aid delivery, means only a small proportion of funds actually reaches the ground and intended beneficiaries. Notwithstanding vested commercial interests in maintaining the status quo, there are more cost-effective and effective ways to reduce the proportion of funds going to 'middlemen'.

The future of this country depends on people with positive thinking. People who can translate simple plans into great outcomes and Sir Mekere is such a Leader this national is looking for. Frankly, the track record of our successive governments in implementing real programs for our people is terrible. We in PNG are very good at planning for development. We have an alphabet soup of agencies and committees and councils all devoted to either planning for development, because the way we have been doing development has not been working. But when it comes to actually implementing development we have completely failed and the UN report highlighted the basic issues - we have been terrible at translating economic growth into development for our people. The proof of that is in our performance in the Human Development Index in which PNG has dropped from the 91st in the world in 1990 to 156th in the world. That is the greatest drop of any country in the world. We are not implementing development. We are talking about development, but we are not implementing anything. We create giant projects for a few so the world outside is deceived into thinking we are what they see in Port Moresby, Lae and few other selected towns, but most of the country is ignored.

Beyond Gransci...... The civil society expresses itself through multiplicity of groups or collectivity attaining diverse objectives. Quite often some of them work as pressure group in the governing process. Such groups and organisations are vertically active from local to the international level and horizontally they are issue and sector specific. Whatever their nature and role may be, they important component of the structural and institutional character of the society. Grant Walton has rightly classified as GONGOs, BONGOs, BINGOs, International NGOs and other Socio-Cultural organisations. They may serve educative, advocacy and developmental purpose or motivate for political action. Certainly they are playing an important role around the world but recent trends indicate that suspicion is being raised about their character as civil society as being non-partisan and apolitical. China, Russia and India are raising suspicion particularly about the international NGOs and contemplating to impose some restrictions on their activities or even ban their operation. It may diminish the role of NGOs as civil society and impose limits on the social enterprise. It appears these countries used the civil society organisations to get connected with civil society in the developed world but now resistant when these civil society organisations started generating awareness among the masses through their educational, advocacy and developmental activities. It is likely to adversely affect the interest of the elite section and their domination may be liquidated in the highly structured society in these countries. There is sufficient evidence that the role of civil society is being diminished in these countries and there are concerted efforts to make the civil society subordinate to the State and Market. Such a trend in these countries will have global impact during next two decades. It may compel one to raise skepticism and suspicion about the realisation of SDGs by 2030.

Dear Glen, Thank you for this powerful and critically important first-hand perspective. Your account resonates with what I have heard throughout the region. There is a better model available and I do believe it would be more impactful, better value for money, and could catalyse sustainability in health education. I will be in touch. Joel

Dear Joel I have worked for the past 28 years training doctors at the SMHS-UPNG and before that for 4 years training HEOs and Health Inspectors at the Madang College of Allied Health Sciences. My experience is that there are very few instances when overseas training is useful to us in PNG in the health sector. And in fact many times people go for overseas training and come back with ideas and agendas which are antithetical to the needs of the PNG health service and effective training of health workers in it. So not only a waste of money, but oftentimes we are handicapped by people with overseas training. There are of course exceptions to the above, but recently I have noticed with the experience of the Australian awards scholarships that they are often given to people who are too old (to be be able to come back and make a difference), or to people who really only want the degree to satisfy their own ego and increase their own status in the system when they return. This particularly applies to PhD awardees. And I also see that a number of Australian institutions really help the overseas candidates cross the line, - to the extent in some cases, of theses being almost ghost written, or at least 'supervised' to the point of hand holding. With regards the Cuban model: the model is good, but not good to send Pacific people to Cuba to do their programs. The latest experience where hundreds (and in the case of E Timor - a thousand) students were sent to Cuba for medical training has been a disaster. I hear that all the 'graduates' from the Solomon islands were unable to pass the basic registration exam on return to Honiara, and as you have noted Kiribati and other places are really struggling to now provide suitable intern (practical clinical) training for their graduates. Heaven knows what is going to happen to the E Timorese grads. When I was in E Timor 18 months ago, the first batch of 300 graduates were back - most had been posted to community health posts and had been given motor bikes to facilitate their work. However, many of them were just motoring around Dilli on the bikes. I was also interested to hear that you say that the Burnet Institute is helping to strengthen our Dept of Public Health at the SMHS: I have not seen any evidence of this. And we really do need assistance with strengthening our faculty at SMHS - and not just in the Dept of Public Health. In fact the whole of doctor training in PNG could fall over if 4-5 of us had heart attacks in the next few months - not unlikely as mostly we are over 60. How do we organize ourselves to get thru to dfat about the above.?? So much money being wasted at present. Glen Mola, Professor of Reproductive Health, Obstetrics and Gynecology, SMHS

That might have to be a topic for another day given that the present series is already so long as to try perseverance. You are correct that the 'other recipients' are unspecified countries only and do not include multilateral organisations and funds. The latter receive about one-third of outflows from DAC donors; developing countries receive the rest plus inflows from multilateral organisations and funds, and from other sources. It's certainly interesting that there has been such an increase in the amount of aid that is reported as bilateral but not attributed to specific countries. One driver of this might be the increase in the reporting of onshore asylum seeker costs. A chart showing the 30-year trend can be viewed <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/ittht1vduny9wi6/Unspecified%20bilateral.png?dl=0" rel="nofollow">here</a>. The proportion of of ODA in this category has increased from 15% in 1983 to 37% in 2013.

Perhaps a course in causal analysis is called for? At least for headline writers.

Great post Robin - it's so easy for these statements to become accepted wisdom through unquestioning repetition unless someone takes the time to unpack the actual data. I'd be interested to hear more in a future post about the flow to ‘other recipients’ - which has mirrored the increase to LDCs over the last decade, but certainly outpaced the growth in ODA to transition countries and longstanding MICs - and what the implications of this are. I infer from your comment in footnote 4 that this does not include funding to the Global Fund, Gavi Alliance and the like?

Social issues are a time bomb to PNG. As an individual, families, communities we need to play our part to stop this explosion. Our economy is booming in regards to the natural resources as this will bring much more issues that will directly affect our youths and bring this country into chaos. To fight social issues, every stake holders of this country has to work even harder to achieve a low level or nil social issues. Our Government has to take the upper hand to combat this mighty battle for the well being of this beautiful nation. I really appreciate the work of The Voice and other organization who are spear heading to fight this ugly battle. Thank you !!..