Global Issues
U.S. Moves Closer to Development Policy Reform
The U.S. took a major step toward overhauling the way it engages in diplomacy and development work Wednesday.
In releasing her agency's much-anticipated — and first-ever — Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called the report 'a sweeping effort that asks a simple question: How can we do better?'
The QDDR, she said is 'a blueprint for how our country can lead in a changing world through the use of what I call 'civilian power' — the combined force of all of the civilians across the U.S. government who practice diplomacy, carry out development projects, and act to prevent and respond to crisis and conflict.'
The proposed reforms mark another step toward implementing the new U.S. development policy President Barack Obama called for in a September speech at the United Nations and which have since been echoed in reforms emphasising host country ownership of development priorities at the U.S. Agency for International Development.
That speech announced a new U.S. Global Development Strategy that would change both the way the U.S. defines development and what it views as the ultimate goal of development.
'Put simply, the United States is changing the way we do business,' Obama said at the time.
Now, the QDDR is proposing changes in how the U.S. does development.
Among the specific proposals, it seeks to make the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) the 'premier development organisation in the world' through new hires and new responsibilities, including moving Feed the Future, the U.S.'s global food security initiative, under the agency's purview immediately and moving the Global Health Initiative there in 2012.
It also calls for stronger relationships with the countries in which the U.S. works and a focus on key investment areas, particularly the rights of women and girls.
But the QDDR's recommendations go far beyond development. One of the key points of the report is a shift to a reliance on 'civilian power' whereby the work of diplomats across agencies and governments would be better integrated and U.S. officials overseas would be both more empowered and held more accountable for their missions' success.
Clinton emphasised that the U.S. must 'adapt to the changing diplomatic and development landscape of the 21st century' and elevate development 'alongside diplomacy as a pillar of American civilian power'.
'In short, we are changing the way we do business from top to bottom,' she said.
The proposals were welcomed by NGOs and development experts as another step toward a more integrated and modern approach to development work.
But both they and Clinton admitted the proposals were not a silver bullet.
Paul O'Brien, vice president of policy and advocacy campaigns for Oxfam America, raised the question of how, in an integrated approach that tries to take both diplomatic and development goals into account, situations where these diplomatic and development goals conflict would be resolved.
The QDDR begins with a vision where a diplomat and a development expert are riding in the same Jeep as a team going to talk with local leaders about projects to reduce poverty in their communities. But O'Brien asks what would happen when that Jeep comes to a fork in the road and has to choose between the two riders' priorities.
'In too many places around the globe, the way the U.S. government operates fails to live up to this vision, with short-term political imperatives taking the Jeep one way and longer-term development priorities going the other,' he said. 'The QDDR will ultimately be judged by whether or not the U.S. government empowers development professionals and priorities to have more influence when our development and diplomatic goals come into tension.'
Clinton responded to this critique Wednesday by saying that the conflict between the goals would not go away but that chiefs of mission would be empowered to ultimately decide, much as a CEO would be at a corporation.
InterAction, a network of U.S.-based NGOs focused on global poverty, echoed O'Brien's concern, though, by pointing out that the State Department would have some oversight over foreign assistance and development strategies and that this could, again, lead to political objectives overriding development ones.
But just as some might feel the new proposals would not emphasise overseas development enough, others — particularly some in the U.S. Congress — are expected to think they go too far.
Clinton seemed very aware of this Wednesday, as she alluded of the difficult political task of convincing an incoming U.S. Congress, which is expected to emphasise debt reduction at the expense of budgets for issues like foreign aid, of the political and economic case for revamping U.S. diplomacy and development.
'Through the QDDR, we have tried to minimise costs and maximise impacts, avoid overlap and duplication, and focus on delivering results. Across our programmes, we are redefining success based on results achieved rather than dollars spent,' Clinton said. 'And this will help us make the case that bolstering U.S. civilian power is a wise investment for American taxpayers that will pay off by averting conflicts, opening markets, and reducing threats.'
Many of the reforms in the QDDR, a draft of which had been leaked a month ago, will not require congressional approval, though, and officials have said that they are willing to compromise on the ones that do.
InterAction's president, Samuel Worthington, emphasised that the QDDR seeks to use aid and diplomacy in a more effective and streamlined manner.
'We urge Congress to support the many positive changes being proposed and to provide the necessary resources for USAID and the State Department as they implement a new, more effective, approach to global development,' he said.
© Inter Press Service (2010) — All Rights Reserved. Original source: Inter Press Service