compete. The problem is not limited to agriculture; U.S. assistance in Bangladesh works to diversify the economy and
expand exports. At the same time, the United States imposes
duties on imports from Bangladesh that exceed the amount
of assistance.
Adequate and Reliable Resources—Interpreting resource requirements broadly: It’s an unfortunate fact that it’s easier to
obtain funding for food aid than for the long-term development that would reduce the need for food aid. The inadequacy of U.S. agricultural and rural development resources has
already been described. The question of adequate resources,
though, extends beyond program funds to include the human resources needed to plan and oversee development efforts. It is particularly unfortunate that there are fewer than
half as many agricultural experts in USAID as there were ten
years ago.
Principles for Restructuring
U.S. Development Assistance
“Our foreign assistance system is broken,” begins a report
by a high-level commission, appropriately named the HELP
Commission, appointed by President Bush and Congressional leaders to study all U.S. foreign assistance programs.11
Other high-level groups12 have reached similar, if less blunt,
conclusions, and even the Secretary of Defense has stated
publicly that reform is needed.13
A new consensus about the overall goals and objectives of
foreign assistance is long overdue. In working toward a more
effective development assistance program, Bread for the
World supports a comprehensive reauthorization of foreign
assistance that embodies the following general principles:
• Global development and global poverty reduction
must be elevated as specific goals in U.S. foreign policy, distinguished from political, military and security
goals, with distinct and secure funding.
• Poverty reduction should be the primary focus of U.S.
development assistance, with substantially more poverty-focused funding provided to meet commitments
made through global ag reements like the Millennium
Development Goals and G8 meetings.
• Development assistance should be undertaken in partnership with recipient countries in support of the development goals they determine in consultation with their
civil society, focused on long-term goals with intermediate objectives.
• Civilian leadership in foreign assistance must be maintained and strengthened, with the Department of Defense limited to its operational strengths in logistics
and stabilization.
• An effective, streamlined agency is required to direct
all U.S. foreign assistance, consolidating the plethora
6 Briefing Paper, July 2008
of foreign assistance programs currently spread across
twelve cabinet departments and numerous agencies.
• Other U.S. policies (e.g. trade, investment, migration)
need to be looked at in light of development assistance
goals and objectives with the goal of minimizing inherent contradictions.
• U.S. development assistance should be more closely
linked with other international donors to reduce the
burdens on recipient governments as well as the costly
duplication of programs.
Bread for the World recommends a cabinet-level department for global development, as part of a reauthorized foreign aid program, as the best means for addressing the foreign aid deficiencies noted above. A department that draws
in most, if not all, of the foreign aid programs currently
scattered throughout the bureaucracy would help produce
a greater degree of policy and program consistency, and ensure that the development voice is heard at the highest level
of foreign policy considerations.
A Model for a U.S. Department of
Development
In 1997, the incoming Labor government in the
United Kingdom (UK) established a new, cabinetlevel Department for International Development
(DFID), with responsibility for the UK aid budget
and other aspects of UK development policy. DFID
is the sole responsibility of a designated cabinet minister. By law, all UK development assistance must either further sustainable development or promote the
welfare of people and contribute to the reduction of
poverty.
The presence of DFID as a full member of the cabinet ensures that development issues are considered
in the formulation of other policies—for example,
trade policy. While development interests do not always take precedence, they are at least identified and
taken into account.
The development/security nexus is addressed
through consultative mechanisms. There are pooled
funds for specific issues, such as a conflict prevention
fund jointly controlled by Defense, the Foreign Office, and DFID. The system appears to be working;
though challenges remain, DFID is generally regarded as the world’s most effective development agency.