Pakistan’s Next Generation: Insecure Lives, Untold Stories

CoverI’m in Lahore launching the third report from Pakistan’s Next Generation Task Force – I’m the Task Force’s director of research.

In the first report, we looked at the economic potential of young people in Pakistan and its ability to collect a demographic dividend as growing numbers of them enter the workforce.

In a second report, published in the run up to last year’s election, we explored the political implications of an electorate that is increasingly dominated by young voters, who are more likely to be educated, urban, and middle class than their parents.

Our third report focuses on how violence and conflict are shaping young lives. At its heart are 1,800 personal accounts which provide a stunning series of insights into a silent epidemic of political, criminal, domestic and sexual violence.

We demonstrate debilitating economic, social and physical damage, and a largely hidden problem – mental health impacts from post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, self-harm, and suicide.

The report calls for urgent action to give a voice to the survivors and victims of violence, respond to their mental and emotional health needs, create opportunities for young people to opt out of violence, and promote reconciliation at provincial and national levels.

It’s a tough report that often makes for uncomfortable reading, but I think it’s essential not only for those interested in Pakistan’s future, but for all those engaged in the broader debate of how to build peaceful and inclusive societies.

You can download the report here.

Surprise! Aid flows are at a new all time high

So here’s a big surprise. Until last year, global aid flows were declining in the wake of the financial crisis – a trend that was widely expected to continue. But here’s what emerged when the OECD’s 2013 aid statistics came out last month:

Development aid rose by 6.1% in real terms in 2013 to reach the highest level ever recorded, despite continued pressure on budgets in OECD countries since the global economic crisis. Donors provided a total of USD 134.8 billion in net official development assistance (ODA), marking a rebound after two years of falling volumes, as a number of governments stepped up their spending on foreign aid.

An annual survey of donor spending plans by the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) indicated that aid levels could increase again in 2014 and stabilise thereafter.

Admittedly, there are two important qualifiers here. One is that while aid may be at an all-time high in absolute terms, that’s not true for the arguably more important measure of aid as a proportion of donor countries’ gross national income: in 2013 they gave 0.30% of GNI, as compared to 0.32% in 2010 (and way lower, of course, than the 0.7% target).

The other point, flagged up by OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurria in his comments on this year’s statistics, is that the trend of falling aid to the neediest countries, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa (which saw a 4% real terms decrease against 2012), is still happening and appears likely to continue in the future. The new aid stats also show that donor countries only gave 0.09% of their GNI to least developed countries in 2012 – as compared to 0.10% the year before.

Donor countries have got to sort this out. While middle income countries now have access to a huge range of sources of finance for development – foreign direct investment, remittances, commercial debt, portfolio equity, and a vast increase in domestic resources from tax revenue and savings – that doesn’t hold true for low income countries, who are still highly reliant on aid. With the post-2015 agenda now about to move into the home straight, this is the year when donors need to set out a clear timetable for making good on their long-standing promise to give at least 0.15% of their GNI to least developed countries – and ideally go beyond it to 0.20%. And the OECD DAC’s High Level Meeting this December is the right moment to do it.

No diplomats, thanks

Anyone who’s spent much time around UN headquarters in New York will know that the one ATM within walking distance of the UN is in the UN Plaza branch of JP Morgan Chase – handily located right across First Avenue from the UN building, and in the same building as UNDP. No surprise, then, that it’s also the bank of choice for numerous diplomats at the UN.

Until now, anyway. For JP Morgan Chase has now decided that, given the increasing compliance costs of anti-money laundering regulations, it’s just not worth its while to offer accounts to foreign officials based in the US. Not only that, but it suddenly decided this on Friday last week – and put the new regime into operation immediately, suspending all diplomats’ credit cards and blocking their accounts.

A terse letter sent to customers said “we recommend that you open a bank account with another financial institution, and begin using it immediately”. Well, yes. Jose Antonio Ocampo, former finance minister of Colombia and a leading contender to run the World Bank last time the job was up for grabs, was quoted like this in the FT: ”Friday was hell for me. I had all my money frozen. I am being treated like a criminal.” According to the same piece, 3,500 accounts have been frozen.

As Colum Lynch notes in the Washington Post, this is rapidly becoming a headache for the State Department, which is obliged under a 1947 UN Agreement to ensure that foreign missions in the US have access to “necessary public services”. State’s Undersecretary for Management, Patrick Kennedy, has been dispatched to NYC to try and persuade banks to cater for the diplo-crowd. Not sure what kind of reception he’s going to get, given that the US’s money laundering crackdown is why all this is happening in the first place…

New Book on Poverty and Development in Fragile States

poverty development fragile statesI am pleased to announce the publication of my new book on fragile states — Betrayed: Politics, Power and Prosperity (Palgrave Macmillan). The book focuses on the biggest challenges in the development field today: how to create inclusive societies, equitable governments, and dynamic economies that will give the poor the opportunity to accumulate the means and skills to control their own destinies. Up to now, change has proved illusive in most parts of the world, leaving three billion people — roughly one-half the population in the developing world — disadvantaged. The concrete suggestions described in my book are targeted at political, economic, and civil society leaders as well as scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and students.

The book combines the latest research on poverty and state building with my personal observations drawn from many years working in the developing world, and covers a far wider range of issues than comparable titles. These include social exclusion processes, ideology, elite incentives, strategic urbanization, connectivity, livelihood factors, power dynamics, transaction costs, social networks, and business linkages.

Former President of Ghana Jerry Rawlings wrote the foreword, calling the book “a compelling and eloquent argument for empowering all citizens, especially the poor.”

I hope you will share this information with your colleagues and friends. You can order a copy from Amazon. Continue reading

Debating stable and peaceful societies

Today, the President of the UN General Assembly hosts a debate on ensuring stable and peaceful societies within the post-2015 development agenda.

I am moderating tomorrow’s session that looks at the global partnership that would be needed if countries are to reduce violence, and tackle the instability that is a threat to the future of a significant proportion of the global population.

As background for the debate, here’s a memo I prepared for the PGA. A long list of possible goals and targets is now on the table in this area (see pages 149-159), but there are deep disagreements among member states as to whether this is an area that should be prioritised within the new goal framework.

My advice:

  1. Recognise this is a genuinely universal agenda – one that affects rich, middle income, and poor countries and where the West, in particular, has a responsibility to demonstrate it is serious about reducing the stresses that destabilise poorer countries.
  2. Give the victims and survivors of violence a voice in this debate, and pay greater attention to the needs of those whose lives are defined by instability (a problem that goes far beyond so-called fragile states).
  3. Draw on the track record of countries that have bounced back from conflict or shown that they are able to reduce violence, turning the debate into one about solutions, not just aspirational targets.

Read the whole report here.

Page 4 of 490« First...345...102030...Last »