Why are we holding governments to the 0.7% GNI aid target?
March 16th, 2009 • Aid, Development, UN
Alex Evans has a provocative post over at Global Dashboard arguing against the sacred cow of the “aspirational target” of aid levels set at 0.7% GNI.
Alex makes some excellent points about the meaningless nature of this target. It was set over three decades ago, wasn’t based on any actual assessment of money needed, and current estimates put the actual required global ODA flows at far lower. And I agree that 0.7 isn’t entirely relevant except as a rhetorical tool for motivating governments to give more.
I think what Alex’s post stands for the strongest is a real need for investigation into how much money is actually needed, and ways to spend the money that actually make a difference. The UN target remains as a powerful burden on our governments who fail to live up to their agreement to convince us why their spending is adequate and well placed.
If the world is ready to move on from 0.7%, and I think clearly we are, then we need to establish what the new benchmark will be and this time actually live up to it.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Related posts:
Recent comments