| July 2006
Development Assistance & Foreign Aid | Health, HIV/AIDS and Infectious Diseases |
Development Assistance & Foreign Aid
H1 - Africa: U.S. Foreign Assistance Issues
CRS Report, 19June 2006, online edition, 19p
Under the Administration’s FY2006 foreign assistance request, U.S. aid to sub-Saharan Africa would continue to grow, due to sharp increases through the State Department’s Global HIV/AIDS Initiative. Twelve “focus countries” in Africa are benefiting substantially under this program. Assistance through the Child Survival and Development Assistance programs would decline, although the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act (P.L.109-102) provides more than requested worldwide for these programs. Overall, non-food aid to Africa would total about $3.6 billion under the request, compared with an estimated $3.4 billion being allocated in FY2005. Fulltext
H2 - Can Doha Still Deliver on the Development Agenda?
Elliott, Kimberly Ann
Institute for International Economics (IIE). June 2006, online edition, 9p
"This report presents the argument that poorer countries have the most to lose if the Doha Round of trade discussions is delayed or postponed. The author states: "A deal on agriculture is critical to the round's success...but many developing countries are more interested in access for labor-intensive manufactured goods, such as clothing." According to Elliott: "While the numbers are small, World Bank scenarios of possible outcomes from the Doha Round suggest that sub-Saharan Africa could gain more from meaningful agricultural liberalization, as a share of national income, than any developing region outside Latin America." If the Doha Round does not move towards successful negotiations, developing countries may be the losers in the bilateral and regional trade negotiations that will follow. And there are further dangers if negotiations stagnate. The French elections in 2007 and the U.S. Congressional elections in 2006 may make negotiations more difficult, depending on the outcomes. Moreover, in the U.S., trade promotion authority (TPA) expires in June 2007." Kimberly Ann Elliott is a senior fellow jointly at the Center for Global Development and the Institute for International Economics. She has been associated with the Institute since 1982. Fulltext
H3 - How Will Greater Foreign Aid Help the Poor This Time?
Easterly, William
Heritage Lectures, July 13, 2006. 7p (This speech was delivered on March 28, 2006.)
The author maintains that aid agencies as an industry should be reorganized and drastically restructured to specialize more in individual monitorable tasks for which they can be held accountable. William Easterly, Ph.D., is a professor of economics at New York University (Joint with Africa House) and co-director of NYU’s Development Research Institute. He also serves as a non-resident fellow of the Center for Global Development in Washington, D.C. Fulltext
H4 - The Great Giveaway
Hechinger, John; Golden, Daniel
The Wall Street Journal, July 8, 2006, v 248, #6, pA1
“This article looks at the new breed of philanthropists who are giving away fortunes before they die to foundations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The current generation of the wealthiest Americans are increasingly realizing that if they make donations now they can have some control over its use and demand accountability from the programs they fund. Warren Buffett, Eli Broad, Charles Bronfman and Sanford Weill typify this new breed of philanthropists.” Order Article
H5 - Key Facts on Corporate Funding
Foundation Center , June 2006, 5p (online version)
2,600 corporate foundations gave an estimated $3.6 billion in 2005, up 5.8 percent from $3.4 billion in 2004. Corporate foundations accounted for 11% of all foundation giving, second only to independent foundations—but down from 17% in 1987. More than half of corporate foundations surveyed expect to increase giving in 2006, while roughly one-third anticipate reductions. Among funding priorities, corporate foundations targeted half of their giving to education (26%) and public affairs/social benefit (24%), including support for community development, federated funds and other philanthropy, public affairs, and civil rights. Fulltext
H6 - Innovative Financing Options and the Fight against Global Poverty: What’s New and What Next?
de Ferranti, David
Brookings Institution, July 2006. 16p
"Can innovative approaches to mobilizing and utilizing financial resources make a difference in the fight against global poverty? Potentially yes, this chapter argues; however, there is no silver bullet in the offing. New approaches can be useful additions to the current array of instruments and activities for helping developing countries, but will not be so broadly applicable and effective that the present mainstays will replaced or needed less. The innovations that have the biggest payoffs will draw especially on private sector channels, either exclusively or, more likely, in partnership with public sector and multilateral channels. The background for this issue is discussed first, then an overview of the options is provided; various ways of thinking about them are outlined, and, finally, three specific options are examined." David de Ferranti, Distinguished Visiting Fellow, Brookings Institution, Global Economy and Development Center. Fulltext
Health, HIV/AIDS and Infectious Diseases
H7 - An Anti-Addiction Pill?
Denizet-Lewis, Benoit
New York Times Magazine; 6/25/2006, v155, #53621, pp48-53
The article reports that new neurological research has shown that addiction is a disorder that involves the parts of the brain responsible for motivation, decision making, pleasure and inhibition control, leading scientists to consider the possibility of an anti-addiction pill. Research into dopamine, glutamate and gamma-aminobutyric acid is promising, but some still warn that addiction is not a matter of brain chemistry alone. Benoit Denizet-Lewis is a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine. He is working on a book about addiction in America. Fulltext
H8 - Quest for the Cure
Check, Erika,
Foreign Policy, Jul/Aug2006, #155, pp28-36
The article discusses efforts to provide third world citizens with prescription medications. Drug companies and government bureaucracies keep individuals from receiving the medication they need, which often goes undeveloped due to a lack of marketability. For the most part, big pharmaceutical companies spend their research money on drugs that don't help poor people... Some brave scientists have had enough of the high costs and red tape. They're frustrated, they're mad, and now they're finding ways to buck the system. Erika Check is a senior reporter at “Nature”. Fulltext
|
