© 2020 Thomas Kaydor, Jr. All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means without the written permission of the author.

Published by AuthorHouse 06/04/2020

ISBN: 978-1-7283-6308-0 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-7283-6333-2 (e)

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models,

and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

DEDICATION

I dedicate this book to the Governments and peoples of Australia and Liberia; the victims of poverty; and to all those working to alleviate extreme poverty, hunger and disease globally.

CONTENTS

Introduction

Part I: Poverty Alleviation

Have we failed very badly in the fight against global poverty in terms of aid effectiveness?

Offering cash to the poor is not enough. This needs to be complemented with social services to really help the poor get out of poverty.

The impact of poor infrastructure on poverty reduction in post conflict countries: the case of Liberia

Obstacles to achieving SDG Two in the Republic of Liberia

Part II: Corruption And Anti-Corruption

Liberia Anti-Corruption Commission (LACC) prosecution rate

Sydney Airport Corruption Case

Part III: Institutions And Policy Processes

Liberia Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) recommendation 12

Liberia direct district development fund

Part IV: National And International Development

Middle Income Trap: The Case of Thailand

Finding a Remedy to United States (US) Inequality

Indonesia and the problem of transboundary haze pollution

Part V: International Cooperation

What will the Africa-China bilateral relationship look like in 2030?

Domesticating the Sustainable Development Goals in Liberia:

President Weah Must Prioritize SDGs Implementation

Annex I

About the Author

INTRODUCTION

We live in a time when the largest numbers of people are being lifted out of absolute poverty in a relatively short time span in human history. This is happening in Asia and in Africa. This is a time when the understanding of development and the topics for development studies are enriched at an unprecedented pace. This is also a time when the dynamic and thriving economic and social changes in developing countries become inspiration for each other or even for the developed world. The experience and efforts of the developing countries to achieve prosperity, social inclusiveness and good governance have gained greater attention than ever. The diverse paths and innovative approaches taken in many of these countries become important cases of study.

To a great extent, the economic recessions and the social problems in the developed world have left more room for, or even pushed developing countries to reflect on the paths to take in the future in terms of development. These can be about: the relationship between economic growth and social development, the relationship between the state and business (, big businesses), the structure of governance, and the approaches to policy learning. These are in no ways suggesting alternatives to the core values for development. The goals, solutions to the problems, and the sources of these solutions can be a lot more varied.

Tom Kaydor was my student at Crawford School of Public Policy at Australian National University. I was his professor of the courses on development policy and on urbanisation. On the first day when the development course started on a summer morning of the Southern Hemisphere in 2014, Tom managed to catch my attention in a packed classroom. He was keen to interact with me and other students and was vocal about what he thought was right and wrong about the theories on development we had yet started to go through. He was clearly concerned about his country and wanted to express the view or multiple views of people from Africa. His passion also influenced other students in class. I was very happy to engage in the conversation, and at the same time became aware that this was a group of students who were frustrated with the history, excited about the present and deeply anxious about the future of their home. The energy these students have shown reflects the energy of their promising homeland.

Tom told me that he is publishing a book and asked me to write an introduction for it. I am delighted and agreed. The essays in this book reflect on the goals, issues and practices in the fields of development, public administration and international relations with particular interests on Liberia or lessons he thinks Liberia should learn from other countries. It is his take on these topics after studying at Crawford School of Australian National University, where he did not only attend lectures, but also had the opportunity to exchange ideas with his fellow students who are from different parts of the world with rich experience in field of development. The essays convey Tom’s enthusiasm in making his voice heard internationally. Now, Tom is working as the Deputy Foreign Minister for International Cooperation and Economic Integration back in his home country (Liberia). His experience will continue to enrich his understanding of these topics. I look forward to the publication of this book and wish him to produce more works in the future.

Professor Bingqin Li (PhD)

Associate Professor, Policy and Governance (POGO)

Crawford School of Economics and Government

Australian National University

PART I

POVERTY ALLEVIATION

HAVE WE FAILED VERY BADLY IN THE FIGHT AGAINST

GLOBAL POVERTY IN TERMS OF AID EFFECTIVENESS?

1.   INTRODUCTION

The fight against global poverty has come a long way. The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were the latest effort to combat global poverty (Annan 2000). As the MDGs expired in 2015, a new global development agenda, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have been developed (United Nations 2014). Developed countries continue to provide overseas development assistance (ODA) or aid to help developing countries overcome extreme poverty. Aid is ‘a sum of concessional loans and grants given to poor countries’ (Moyo 2009, p.7). ‘Concessional loans are monies lent at below market interests’ rates for longer periods than ordinary commercial loans, while grants are monies given for nothing in return’. (p. 7). Aid is divided into three components. First, humanitarian aid is provided in response to catastrophes and calamities like the ebola virus disease outbreak in West Africa, flus, earthquakes and tsunamis (Riddle 2014). Second, charity-based aid is disbursed through charitable organizations to the needy (Moyo 2009). Last, ‘systematic aid is payments made to recipient countries through bilateral or multilateral channels’ (P.7).

Aid is a post-World War II phenomenon which began with the Marshal Plan aimed at Europe’s reconstruction (OECD 2014). Following the reconstruction of Europe, the OECD was founded in 1961 to help newly independent and poor countries undertake development programmes (OECD 2014). Presently, these traditional donors have been joined by new ones in providing aid to developing countries. This essay examines whether the world has failed very badly in the fight against global poverty in terms of aid effectiveness. It argues that the world has not failed so baldly in using aid to fight against global poverty, but that donors and recipient countries need to target aid at programmes that directly get the poor out of absolute poverty in low-income countries (LICs), and narrow the inequality gap in middle-income countries (MICs).

2.   GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS TO END EXTREME POVERTY

The developed world, the World Bank (WB) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have used many strategies to deliver ODA to developing countries. First, the basic needs strategy was adopted in the 1970s-1980s (Haynes 2008). This strategy called for synergies between ‘national development policies, local community development needs, and international development assistance’ (p. 29). It focused on the provision of sufficient food, clean water, adequate shelter, primary health care, and at least elementary education for the poor (Stewart 2006). This strategy failed because it was subsumed into the Cold War ideological divide which made aid a political tool rather than a developmental one (Thomas 2005), and due to misappropriation of aid by elites in the developing countries (Haynes 2008). Second, the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) was adopted in the 1980s-90s (Haynes 2008). It ‘encouraged fiscal and monetary discipline, free trade, free capital flow and economic cooperation among states’ (p.30). Aid was preconditioned on private sector led development, spending cuts on basic services, reduced wages, limited state intervention in markets, and trade liberalization (Haynes 2005). The SAP also failed because ‘it was externally imposed on developing countries, and its increased poverty in poor states’ (Haynes 2008, p.31).

Third, the ‘Washington Consensus replaced the SAP in the 1990s-2000’ (Thomas & Reader 2001, p.79). It assumed that growth and development are contingent on good policies and good institutions (Haynes 2008). Good policies meant ‘stable macroeconomic policies, liberal trade and investment, privatization, deregulation of state-owned assets; while good institutions meant democratic governance, secured property rights, independent central banks and transparent cooperate governance’ (P.33). The Washington Consensus arguably failed because it ignored the strategic role of the state and non-state actors in delivering human development goals (Haynes 2008), though Williamson (2005) argues that this was not a ‘global policy prescription, but rather a measure for Latin American countries that faced economic challenges beginning 1989’(p.33). Notwithstanding, some components of the Washington Consensus like secured property rights, independent central banks, stable macroeconomic policies, et al. remain relevant to date.

The SDGs are the current global poverty reduction strategy. Goal seventeen calls for global partnership for development. Developed countries commit to develop open, rule-based, predictable, non-discriminatory trading and financial system; address special needs of least developed and landlocked countries, and small island states, and deal comprehensively with developing countries’ debt. Under the MDGs, ‘only four targets were met’ (WB 2013, p. 4). Thus, the successes and failures of the MDGs sparked controversy. For instance, Munoz (2008) argued that Africa failed to meet the MDGs because it had poor starting conditions including weak institutions, conflict, and inflexible assistance’ (p. 1). This argument sounds good because all regions had different levels of socio-economic and political conditions (Easterly 2009), hence the need to have disaggregated set targets based on the reality in regions and states. However, poor starting conditions cannot be an excuse for Africa and other regions doing poorly in meeting the MDGs. Poor countries need to take responsibility of their own development priorities as agreed in the Accra Agenda for Action (2008). Conversely, Poku and Whitman (2011) argue that the MDGs have significantly reduced global poverty. Those living ‘below US$1 daily fell from 40 per cent in 1981 to 18 per cent in 2004, and US$2 daily fell from 67 to 48 per cent in said period’ (Chen & Ravaillon 2007, p.1). Without the MDGs, the current levels of global poverty reduction would not have been possible (Vandemoortele 2011, Ratzan, S 2010). However, ‘global poverty has reduced mainly due to growth in China and India, but there will still be more than 700m people living less than US$1 a day by 2015’ (Chen & Ravaillon 2007, p.1-2).

In 2013, US$134.8b of net ODA was spent on developing countries (OECD 2013). This shows a decline in aid to LICs and fragile states and tends to support claims that developed countries exploit poorer countries whereby more resources leave developing countries to support development in rich states. For example, Health Poverty Action (2014) argues that ‘Sub-Saharan Africa receives US$134b each year in aid, but US$192b; hence a negative ODA balance of US$58b’ (pp. 5-6). Most OECD countries have defaulted on the 0.7 per cent of GNI committed to help developing countries (UN Millennium Project 2006). Only Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and UK have met the target. The US, Germany, France, Japan and the rest have defaulted (UN 2013; Santamaria 2014). This raises further questions about the developed countries’ commitment to help their poor counterparts. It has also sparked debate about the relevance of aid among scholars like Jeffry Sachs, William Easterly, Paul Collier, Dambisa Moyo, Roger Riddle, et al.

3.   ANALYSIS OF THEORETICAL DEBATES ON AID EFFECTIVENESS

Jeffery Sachs (2005) argues that developing countries are caught in poverty trap, physical geographic trap, landlocked country trap, fiscal trap, governance trap, cultural barriers, geopolitical trap, lack of innovation, and demographic trap. He asserts that ‘poverty itself can be a trap caused by a lack of capital per person’ (p. 56). This means that the poor do not save enough physical and human capital because their entire income is spent on survival. Sachs (2005) concludes that ‘before