<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Tuesday, August 14, 2007

What is it that aid advocates don't get? 

In case you missed it, Nick Kristof wrote yet another op-ed in the NYTimes that is either utterly confusing or reflective of the confusion that he himself feels about the aid issue. On the one hand, he admits that there is mounting evidence that aid either doesn't work, or worst case, it leads to negative outcomes. On the other hand, he wants more aid, not less.
A handful of recent books and studies suggest that aid is sometimes oversold, including the superb new work called “The Bottom Billion,” by Paul Collier, the World Bank’s former research economist (it’s the best nonfiction book so far this year). A forthcoming book, “Farewell to Alms,” by Gregory Clark, a University of California economist, even argues that conventional aid can leave African countries worse off than ever.

And a study by two economists formerly of the I.M.F., Raghuram Rajan and Arvind Subramanian, forthcoming in The Review of Economics and Statistics, concludes:

“We find little robust evidence of a positive (or negative) relationship between aid inflows into a country and its economic growth. We also find no evidence that aid works better in better policy or geographical environments, or that certain forms of aid work better than others. Our findings suggest that for aid to be effective in the future, the aid apparatus will have to be rethought.”

So does this mean we should give up on foreign aid?

No, not at all. On the contrary, I believe there is an urgent need for more aid. But this is an important discussion worth having, and the critics (though a minority of the experts) make some fair points. Plus, there’s no doubt that aid can be made more effective.
Is it just me that simply cannot understand Kristof in this piece? Paul Collier is no Milton Friedman and yet, the The Bottom Billion states the obvious in very polite terms. As for the call for aid to me made "more effective," I can't help get that deja vu feeling all over again (to paraphrase Yogi the Berra) given this is what every advocate of aid says every time more evidence emerges of the inefficacy of aid.

To me, it seems like Kristof is having a very hard time reconciling his very strong good-guy instincts with what is mounting evidence that contradicts his fundamental beliefs. Dan Drezner is a lot harsher than I am, when he poses this question: Is Nick Kristof insane?