Post an IdeaIt only takes a minute Most PopularWhat's Hot Most RecentJust Posted Most CommentedWhat's Creating a Buzz?

Comments & Ideas have closed

Thank you for your Comments & Ideas!

 

  « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »
2092
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 3: understanding africa

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 15:20 PM     category: 1. Structure of program

1 person expressed confusion about expanded engagement in Africa. Another person, experienced in East Africa, articulated their belief in the need to differentiate between countries, political systems, resources, languages etc in any discussion on aid to Africa (rather than ‘lump all aid for Africa into a discussion’)... 

[refer TOR 1A]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
2056
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 4: sub-national set-up

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 15:21 PM     category: 1. Structure of program

1 person suggested more focus on sub-national government (such as in PNG), including locating program offices in the provinces rather than in capital cities. Another person noted the trend or intent in recent years towards delivering more Australian aid programs at provincial, district and ward levels, managed by provincial offices... 

[refer TOR 1A] 

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
2081
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 5: about national interest

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 15:34 PM     category: 1. Structure of program

3 people noted and questioned the latter part of the current objective of Australian aid 'to reduce poverty, achieve sustainable development...in line with Australia's national interests'. 2 people expressed views that 'national interest' was ambiguous or could be taken to mean economic interests. 1 person said the moral obligation was to spend the 0.3% of GNI on alleviating poverty, separate to the 99.7% for Australia's national interest.

Another person referenced Aid/Watch comment that half of Australian aid 2007-09 was channelled through the ADF. 2 people noted while regional stability in Asia-Pacific was important, the role or anchor of foreign aid could be 'the promotion and securing of human rights'. 1 person suggested that, "developing countries can't expect an equal partnership when aid is posited as delivering economic benefits for the Australian community instead of focussing on alliveating poverty"...

[refer TOR 1A]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
2430
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 6: sectors - basics first

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 15:37 PM     category: 1. Structure of program

4 people noted education as a high priority sector, including university qualifications for now-senior people in developing nations. A further 3 people noted health, and another person mentioned water and sanitation, food security and nutrition as key priority sectors. 2 people mentioned supporting livelihoods. 1 person suggested approx. half of aid should support a ‘basics first’ sector approach, as per the Australian domestic funding prioritisation for health and education.  1 person mentioned  programs that facilitate economic growth and trade liberalization...

[refer TOR 1B]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
2289
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 7: ict is a key sector

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 15:39 PM     category: 1. Structure of program

3 people advocated the use of ICT as a tool and enabler in poverty eradication. They suggested raising awareness of and education in, IT, and showing how it can be used to create opportunities. Practical examples included use in micro-credit, ‘mobile-friendly’ sites on health/education, NGOs using SMS-texting for feedback. 2 people suggested people working in the field should share or encourage more information online or in the public domain...

[refer TOR 1B]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
10520
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 8: disability inclusive

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 15:40 PM     category: 1. Structure of program

3 people suggested aid be directed to marginalized groups such as people with disabilities, of whom 400 million are living in Asia-Pacific. They suggested Australia continue its global leadership on disability inclusive development. Another suggested few major bilateral donors are active in this area, and the need to consider disability separately to health. 1 made recommendations from ADDC's submission to the review showing how disability inclusive development should be 'mainstreamed' across development, in particular across the MDGs...

[refer TOR 1B]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
2352
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 9: integrating sectors

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 15:42 PM     category: 1. Structure of program

1 person suggested a greater focus on how sectors interact and the synergies available between sectors. Another person suggested new categories to avoid both silos and ‘layering’ sectors, e.g. ‘child development that would encompass both education and health’. 1 person suggested a human rights framework that could target funding to areas where it was most needed both sectorally and geographically – such as addressing gender inequality in Melanesian countries. Another person expressed views of some impracticalities in implementing a human rights approach in all countries...

[refer TOR 1B]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
2172
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 10: focus on country income

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 15:43 PM     category: 1. Structure of program

1 person noted that there are 5 LDCs in the Pacific, and there should be more aid focus on these countries. Another noted that aid support for economies should not be based solely on their status as a non-LDC economy (given high rates of HIV and AIDS in PNG, or economic governance issues in Indonesia). Another person suggested focus on the poorest people in both low and middle-income countries...

[refer TOR 1C]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
1970
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 11: individuals' experience

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 15:45 PM     category: 1. Structure of program

3 people said the lack of people with long-term experience in development e.g. across Melanesia and Africa is an issue (despite ‘lots of people with theory and opinions’), as is a deemed lack of cross-cultural understanding. They suggested donors encourage people to develop more Pacific expertise. 1 person suggested an internal project office in AusAID to undertake work being done by external consultants. 1 consultant suggested more thought-through, useful and timely TORs/tasks.

Another consultant suggested delegating more to Posts, reducing reliance on technical committees, making individual agency staff more responsible, more local/Australian joint ventures. 1 person requested a review to improve youth programs - to do better and avoid tokenistic projects. They also suggested the 'great pool of talent attracted to work in aid... should be enabled to innovate and work with local institutions and staff to achieve outcomes in communities'...

[refer TOR 1D]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
1925
Vote!
vote!

average rating:
give rating:

idea 12: bring together actors

posted by: ADG, 24 Mar 2011, 15:46 PM     category: 1. Structure of program

1 person noted the need for 'complementarity of actors' and the work of the Clinton Foundation in bringing together governments, NGOs and businesses. They suggested this approach be pursued in all program designs and on an ongoing basis. 1 person noted the need for a sustainable mix of working with ‘local governments, NGOs, private sector and community groups’. Another person asked to reduce outsourcing of programs to avoid dilution of accountability and lack of incentives for ongoing improvement...

[refer TOR 1D]

Do you strongly agree? If so, please vote here.

 
  « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »