There’s a lot to be said for good data sense, and one way the Millennium Challenge Corporation could demonstrate such sense next year is to replace their current corruption measure with a better one: surveyed evidence of bribes paid.
To say that John Bolton, President-elect Trump’s expected pick for #2 at the State Department, is a well-known UN critic would be an understatement. But it’s well worth noting that he has opinions about the IMF and the multilateral development banks too.
Over the past decade, the US government has repeatedly committed to incorporate greater country ownership into the way it designs and delivers aid programs. Though a range of factors—including strong domestic pressures—influence foreign assistance, US aid agencies have taken concrete steps to strengthen country ownership in their programs. A new policy paper, The Use and Utility of US Government Approaches to Country Ownership: New Insights from Partner Countries, draws upon survey data from government officials and donor staff in 126 developing countries to explore partner country perceptions of 1) how frequently the US government engaged in practices associated both favorably and less favorably with the promotion of country ownership, and 2) how useful each of those practices was.
Uncertainties abound for the United States’ developing country trade partners in the wake of Donald Trump’s election as president. As I chronicled previously, the US presidential campaign featured plenty of tough rhetoric on trade.
Next Tuesday the Millennium Challenge Corporation’s (MCC) board of directors will hold its final meeting of the year—and the last under the Obama administration. On the docket? Selecting which countries will be eligible for MCC assistance for fiscal year (FY) 2017. For the fourteenth year running, CGD’s MCC Monitor discusses overarching issues that will impact the decisions and offers predictions of which countries will be selected.
Here at CGD, much of what we have to say is based on a core premise that too often goes unstated. Namely, that US development policy, with bipartisan support, has made steady progress over many years as one of the more effective things our government does. It is, day in and day out, advancing US interests around the world and at home. It’s a time of fundamental uncertainty about the future direction of US development policy, so let’s talk fundamentals.
President-elect Trump has a unique opportunity to, finally, make US trade policy more inclusive and fair, and he could start by getting our own house in order. From a domestic standpoint, it is not enough that trade agreements' net benefits are positive.
President-elect Trump will come into office at a time when Americans are more dependent than ever on global cooperation. Today we revisit why effective US leadership on development matters and how it can be improved.
What does the collective wisdom of four USAID administrators have to say about the future of the world’s largest development agency? Three former administrators joined current USAID Administrator Gayle Smith at the USAID Alumni Association’s (UAA) annual general meeting to discuss what they wish they had known before they started the job and what advice they would give a new agency lead.