The most surprising thing I saw in this article was the fact that Americans believed that 25% of the gross national income was spent on foreign aid. I found that to be quite funny. According to Jeffrey Sachs (Columbia University), the US spends only 0.22% of the GNI in direct foreign aid or roughly $27.6 billion. Sachs usually claims that if the developed world spent 0.7% of its total GNI on official foreign aid they could eliminate poverty in the rest of the world. That amounts to roughly $93.8 billion each year in foreign aid. Some may dispute that claim yet we have no doubt that it is within the means of the developed nations to do more for the developing nations. The question is whether those who rule over us will ever willingly do so. Sweden may have the ability to pull it off yet they are hardly like the giant USA in terms of thinking or culture. Often when I run across Sach’s comments or articles similar to this I wonder: “Just imagine if we spent a similar fraction of that money on renewable technologies and sustainable food production. Think of what we could accomplish!”
****
Humanitarian Response Index: What Could $93.8 Billion Extra a Year Do to End Poverty?
NOVEMBER 30, 2007 3:24 PM
We’ve written before about making disaster and humanitarian relief efforts more effective. Here’s a new tool to aid such efforts: the Humanitarian Response Index, created by a Madrid-based nonprofit called Dara. Per Foreign Policy’s blog, the index “ranks 22 developed countries plus the European Commission in five categories: response to humanitarian needs; integration of relief with development; work with NGOs; implementation of international law; and promotion of accountability.”
FP highlights findings related to aid given by the United States: in absolute terms, the US ranks high in money given for aid, thanks to the size of the US economy. But it falls well down on the list’s rating overall, because just 0.22 percent of our gross national income (GNI) is spent on aid (based on 2005 numbers), adding up to $27.6 billion.
The funny thing is, most Americans seem to think their country is opening the spigots when it comes to foreign aid. According to statistics compiled by Columbia University professor and FP contributor Jeffrey Sachs, the typical American believes that 25 percent of the gross national income (GNI) is spent on foreign aid. In actuality, the OECD reports that the U.S. provided just 0.22 percent of its GNI in direct foreign aid in 2005, or $27.6 billion.
Sachs claims that poverty could be wiped off the map if the developed world spent 0.7 percent of its total GNI on official foreign aid, yet only five countries do so: Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. If the United States followed their example, American taxpayers would shell out approximately $93.8 billion each year in foreign aid…it’s astonishing what could be accomplished if the United States were more like Sweden—in other words, if it increased the U.S. foreign aid budget to 0.7 percent of GNI. For a mere $93.8 billion, the United States could keep all of its current funding commitments and also:
• Fully fund the $22.1 billion needed in 2008 to fight HIV/AIDS in low and middle-income countries, according to UNAIDS.
• Supply the World Food Program with the expected $3.3 billion needed to pay for all of its project operations in 2008.
• Treat the 425 million people infected with malaria every year for $2.40 a pop, for a total cost of $1.02 billion.
• Single-handedly fund the $5.03 billion U.N. peacekeeping budget in 2006.
0 Responses to “What Could $93.8 Billion Extra a Year Do to End Poverty?”