COMMENTARY: Whither the Development Leaders?

A Commentary by CEDPA President Carol Peasley

Oct. 30, 2009 — Momentum for reforming the way the U.S. manages and delivers development aid to other countries has ebbed and flowed over the past year.

Studies were released in fall 2008, all poised to influence U.S. presidential candidates and the eventual winner on why reform is needed and how to proceed. Advocacy groups formed; countless briefing papers were presented to the new presidential administration and to Congress.

There is no doubt that U.S. foreign assistance needs reform. Despite many successful examples of how U.S. investments have improved health and well-being in other nations, too many federal agencies have overlapping responsibilities for various parts of our development agenda. And, the Foreign Assistance Act remains a complex, out-of-date set of legislation sorely in need of streamlining.

I was certainly encouraged in early 2009 when reform seemed certain – and by the elevation of “development” as a foreign policy priority within speeches by President Obama and his new team.

Since earlier in the year, there has been some progress, in great part fueled by Congress. Bills have been drafted and there is bipartisan support for them. Further effort is being made to rewrite completely the Foreign Assistance Act, originally drafted in 1961. The Administration has initiated two important exercises (with typical “inside the Beltway” titles): a Presidential Study Directive on Global Development Policy, led by the National Security Council and the National Economic Council, and a Quadrennial Review of Diplomacy and Development, led by the State Department.

These steps should indicate that reform is near. As someone who has spent my life dedicated to international development, I should be feeling good, but I instead feel a huge sense of misgiving. Why?

I am most concerned that the voices of experienced development professionals, people who have worked long and hard in other countries and have seen the complexities of development on the ground, are not as prominent as they should be.

This is in great part because of the delay in nominating an Administrator for the U.S. Agency for International Development and in confirming the CEO for the Millennium Challenge Corporation. Their voices should – in fact, must – be at the table as the President defines his approach to global development. Yet, they are absent as Obama’s Administration develops new initiatives in a number of areas, including around global health and food security.

The Washington Post has made an ongoing joke of the delay in nominating a USAID Administrator, but by now it has become a stale joke. Let’s hope we can applaud a nomination in the very near future – and that the individual will be a true development expert. Experienced voices are key in working with Congress and the non-governmental community to develop a new legislative framework for foreign assistance.

We need a new foreign aid framework that is based on American values and priorities, but also recognizes that true development must be led by countries themselves. We need a new framework that provides a true partnership between the U.S. Government, the private sector and the non-profit community. We need a new framework that focuses on results – and recognizes that development is a long-term process. It should not be measured by how funds are spent, but by how people’s lives are improving.

Lastly, in thinking about the importance of the “development voice,” I can’t stop thinking about the voices of women leaders I heard most recently last month at CEDPA. In September, we conducted a reproductive health training for 26 fantastic women leading health programs in eight countries, including communities in Pakistan, Tanzania and Ethiopia. They reminded me each day of the enormous challenges they face – from cultural barriers, to insufficient quantities of contraceptives and other medical supplies, to inadequate resources – and also inspired me by their commitment and tenacity in meeting health needs of women and their families.

Those of us who care deeply about development must always remember to highlight the voices of those who slog through the trenches on the issues. That is true for us at CEDPA. It should also be true for those at the highest levels of policy making here in Washington, DC.

Good intentions are never enough. The voices of experts and practitioners must always be at the leadership table when it comes to a national investment as important as international development.

  What is RSS?