The UN, the US, and development cooperation: time for a reunion.

• Author: Speth, James Gustave
• Position: Includes related articles on the strengths of the UN in development and the pillars of a new architecture for development assistance

My first thesis is that we need more official development assistance (ODA), not less, whatever the current mood might be. Let me take on this subject by dispelling two myths.

The first is that the developing world is doing pretty well and that things are basically on track. The second myth is related: that to the extent some countries are not in good shape - and some obviously are not - "it's their own damn fault", to borrow a phrase from that American philosopher (and singer) Jimmy Buffett. These countries should just get their policies straight, including adjusting to the transformative world market, and enjoy the ride, the argument goes.

Indeed, it is true that there have been remarkable successes in human development. Average life expectancy in the developing world has increased by over one third in the last 30 years. More than 70 per cent of the people in developing countries now have some access to health services. Primary school enrolment has increased to over 80 per cent.

But the world is a big place - complicated, diverse and unfair. Contrary to some rather hopeful claims, much of the developing world is not "making it". Desperation and devastation are still the lot of many people. Some 1.3 billion people live in absolute poverty, with incomes of less than a dollar a day, and poverty is growing as fast as populations. Sixty per cent of humanity lives on less than $US2 per day. Over a hundred countries are worse off today than they were 15 years ago. Each year, 13 million to 18 million people, mostly children, die from hunger and poverty-related causes.

These facts, and others, should shock us. We must not allow ourselves to become numbed by them, particularly when the world economy is expanding as rapidly as it has been.

I would submit that the defining concern of international affairs in the decades ahead will be the struggle for equity: equity within nations, equity among nations, equity for future generations, equity between men and women.

Without sustained progress to a more equitable world, growing poverty and joblessness, population pressures, the decline of environmental resources, and the widening gap between the haves and have-nots will breed despair and instability. They have already begun to do so, and the list of countries in or near crisis is growing.

No one would attribute today's problems solely to underdevelopment, but it is surely part of the disease; and development - sustainable human development - must always be part of the cure.

But isn't trade, not aid, the answer? Can't private investment replace development assistance and do the job better? Won't privatization and structural adjustment do the trick? Consider these points:

* Eighty per cent of direct foreign investment in the developing world goes to only a dozen countries - all middle income countries, with the exception of China. Just 5 per cent goes to Africa, and 1 per cent to the 48 least developed countries. There is simply no correlation between need and foreign investment.

* Unless special development cooperation measures are launched, the recent trade liberalization agreements are expected to benefit much of the developing world to only a limited degree, and much of Africa, perhaps not at all.

* Meanwhile, the debt burden on the developing world continues to mount, now reaching $2.1 trillion. Sub-Saharan Africa's debt payments are larger than its expenditures on health and education.

Today's challenges of poverty, growing inequality, and peace and stability will not, and cannot, be met without continued international cooperation and without new and additional financial aid resources.

A...