<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: World diets; moslem tigers; British aid policy; untranslatable words; good and bad biofuels; fractals and finance; shooting poverty: links I liked</title>
	<atom:link href="https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/world-diets-british-aid-policy-untranslatable-words-good-and-bad-biofuels-fractals-and-finance-shooting-poverty-links-i-liked/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/world-diets-british-aid-policy-untranslatable-words-good-and-bad-biofuels-fractals-and-finance-shooting-poverty-links-i-liked/</link>
	<description>How active citizens and effective states can change the world</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Jul 2017 12:33:16 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.15</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Stoll</title>
		<link>https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/world-diets-british-aid-policy-untranslatable-words-good-and-bad-biofuels-fractals-and-finance-shooting-poverty-links-i-liked/#comment-1893</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Don Stoll]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 03:12:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/?p=3999#comment-1893</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thank you for directing me to Madeline Bunting&#039;s thoughtful piece in The Guardian about the dangerous contradictions she sees in UK aid policy—an article cogently summarized by her subheading, &quot;Seeking quick wins in development sends civil servants chasing fictional figures while long-term poverty reduction suffers.&quot; But, even granting the unreasonableness of the new government&#039;s demand that the Department for International Development must show overnight successes, fairness to DFID Secretary Andrew Mitchell enjoins modesty about the development community&#039;s record in &quot;long-term poverty reduction.&quot;

We in the development community need to do a better job of achieving the latter goal—on shrinking budgets, unfortunately—in light of underwhelming public approval of what aid does. For example, Bunting cites a survey by the Institute of Development Studies showing that fifty-three percent of UK citizens believe &quot;most UK aid is wasted.&quot; (I write from the United States where, I promise you, equal or greater suspicion of aid flourishes.) No doubt the truth about UK—and USA—aid is less grim, but public perceptions matter in democracies. When (or if?) flush economic times return, the development community will want a happier image.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for directing me to Madeline Bunting&#8217;s thoughtful piece in The Guardian about the dangerous contradictions she sees in UK aid policy—an article cogently summarized by her subheading, &#8220;Seeking quick wins in development sends civil servants chasing fictional figures while long-term poverty reduction suffers.&#8221; But, even granting the unreasonableness of the new government&#8217;s demand that the Department for International Development must show overnight successes, fairness to DFID Secretary Andrew Mitchell enjoins modesty about the development community&#8217;s record in &#8220;long-term poverty reduction.&#8221;</p>
<p>We in the development community need to do a better job of achieving the latter goal—on shrinking budgets, unfortunately—in light of underwhelming public approval of what aid does. For example, Bunting cites a survey by the Institute of Development Studies showing that fifty-three percent of UK citizens believe &#8220;most UK aid is wasted.&#8221; (I write from the United States where, I promise you, equal or greater suspicion of aid flourishes.) No doubt the truth about UK—and USA—aid is less grim, but public perceptions matter in democracies. When (or if?) flush economic times return, the development community will want a happier image.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jiesheng</title>
		<link>https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/world-diets-british-aid-policy-untranslatable-words-good-and-bad-biofuels-fractals-and-finance-shooting-poverty-links-i-liked/#comment-1892</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jiesheng]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2010 12:43:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/?p=3999#comment-1892</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[British aid policy, despite its success is still uncooridinated==well at elast not as bad as in the US]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>British aid policy, despite its success is still uncooridinated==well at elast not as bad as in the US</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
