BeauZilesnick Internationalaid bringsbothbenefits& problemsfor a countrytryingto developits economy.With the aid of namedexamples,evaluatethis view.

International aid describes money or resources that are transferred from economically developed to less economically developed countries. It is also expected by the donor country not re receive full or direct repayment. In 1970 the UN suggested that developed countries give a minimum of 0.7% of their GNP in foreign aid. Whilst many northern European countries have met this target, many countries fall behind this target. For example the USA, whilst being the biggest donor, ($20bn in 2008) it represents just 0.16% of their GDP. When looking at aid we must examine the different ways aid can be distributed, and this can be broken down into three main systems: Bilateral aid, is where aid is given directly by the government of a donor country to a recipient country. Multilateral aid, given by a donor country to an international organisation, such as the World Bank who then use the money to assist developing countries. Finally there are NGOs, who also provide and distribute aid. Some NGOs are charities, which raise money to use for aid programmes; others are more involved with the management of projects, to ensure that aid is effectively distributed. In addition to this aid can be short term, such as emergency aid or long term for example looking towards improving the economy of a country. However aid whilst on the surface appears to be the perfect solution to any countries development woes, it can also be incredibly problematic when not implemented correctly. I am going to look at both sides of aid. Kawempe, one of Kampalas worst slums, in Uganda, has been greatly affected by severe development issues caused by mhuge growth in population, as a result of urbanrural migration, has grown to over 300,000 in 20 years. Most of these residents live in poverty, in an area with no amenities, including no proper sanitation, this has caused increased HIV prevalence, predicted to be around 25%. Water is only available from a few privately managed outlets. The City Community Challenge (C3) is a long term aid programme which aims to reduce urban poverty in Uganda and Zambia. The UKs Department for development DFID has provided $2m USD to help fund the scheme. This is a prime example of bottom up approach, where the C3 project has encouraged local initiative and the involvement of locals, helps foster a sense of ownership to the project. By 2004 the C3 fund had supported a range of businesses such as fish farming, to charcoal making, broom making, carpentry, water supply to maize trading. These projects worked so effectively by providing micro-credit to residents of around $1001000 USD per project. This is a prime example of bottom-up development empowering the locals to help themselves, and it allows them to choose what they most need, which is often over looked in top-down aid from a large governmental scheme due to the shear size the project operates on. Furthermore, one reason why bottom-up development works so well whilst the people may be poor, they are survivors, they have had to cope in these dire situations, but through their own hard work and creativity, have been able to survive. However bottom-up is not the perfect solution in all cases. Firstly, it is difficult to expand smaller projects across to cover wide areas of people. This is due to the scale of the projects but also down to funding. NGOs have limited funds and even large ones such as Oxfam have income fluctuations due to external financial circumstances, for example the recession.

BeauZilesnick Just like bottom-up aid, top-down aid has both its positives and negatives when trying to develop a countries economy. Top down works by where money and large schemes comes from governments and NGOS and it is then expected to trickle down to the poorest in society. One of the main issues that arises from top down aid is the difficulties that organisations and governments face with issues of distribution and scale. In 2002 in Swaziland, Southern Africa after a season have severe droughts. The area has also stricken with an HIV/AIDS pandemic, at it is peak it is thought 42% of the 1milllon were infected and as parents died, the number of orphans increased. Organisations trying to help the sick and hungry families included UNICEF, the World Food Programme and NERCHA and some smaller NGOs. The WFPs effort of monthly food rations, including cheap imported maize to help this famine stricken country recover as quickly as possible in the hope that they can begin to establish their economy. However this method of aid was not the most beneficial. As so many people were receiving free food, including imported maize, the local farmers wre struggling to sell their own produce and were becoming unable to pay their loans. This is a prime example of emergency aid which has the intention of helping the greater good in the shortest possible time ends up doing potentially more damage than good in the long term. However emergency aid does not always have to have a negative impact, it just depends on how the aid is distributed and what kind of aid it is. The LAqulila Food initiative set founded by the G8 aims to improve rural agriculture, of countries including Malawi, which was struck by famine in 200 . The G8 worked on the idea of give a man a fish, feed him for a day, teach a man to fish, feed him for life. But they went one step further, instead of just throwing food and equipment at the country, which is undeniably beneficial to some extent for short term responses to disaster, they invested . In developing infrastructure. These poor African countries lack the roads, the markets and the crops and infrastructure to support trade, so therefore they were crippled in their developing potential. By providing the locals with a more weather resistant crop and teaching them improved agricultural techniques they were able to improve crop yields beyond their needs and were able to sell excess for profit, thus helping the country develop its economy. Another issue is that a donor country; to satisfy their own agenda, can misuse aid money and that it can be subject to conditionality- known as tied aid. One example where tied aid was abused was the Peragu Dam scandal in 1991. The UK gave Malaysia 234m in aid towards the development of a hydroelectric dam. However it was revealed that this aid was tied to an arms deal that Malaysia made with the UK. This violated the 1980 Overseas Development and Co-Operation Aid, as aid must benefit the recipients countrys economy or the welfare of the people. It was deemed essential by the World Development Movement to stop this deal as it could become acceptable to sweeten any trade or political budget by using the aid budget. The WDM won in the high court and the aid was not allowed. In conclusion, it is clear to see that aid comes in a variety of forms and can bring positive effects when implemented in a thoughtful manner that fully recognises the recipient countries needs. Unfortunately sometimes aid can either be abused, or can be a little short sighted and not look at the problems that there aid may potentially bring in the future by not allowing the country to develop their economy by simply providing them with everything they need, but none of the infrastructure or education that would really benefit them.