“An independent institution with intelligent scientists will have to judge the effectiveness of aid,” said a liberal member of the Dutch parliament several months ago. Why did he propose this?  Is it because he wants to improve the effectiveness of aid or to abandon it by proving a lack of results? Let’s have a more detailed look at the situation.

According to the MP, more and more people are questioning the benefits of aid. The MP indirectly suggests that aid does not help and results are not measured.  However, if you look deeper into these issues, you'll find that aid organizations really do a good job in measuring and giving accountability. The MP references an independent scientific study which states that 20% of aid projects fail. This sounds dramatic, but if compared to other subsidized sectors it is quite successful. For example, 75% of innovation projects fail. If the MP really wants to improve the world, perhaps he could tackle protectionism, the excessive use of commodities, or the misuse of labor in developing countries? Or, more directly, why not look at the binding requirements of aid, that it must be used for products from the donor country?  Some studies have shown that from every aid dollar given by the United States, 86 cents never leaves the US, or comes back to America through purchases and other transfers (source: http://www.actionaid.org.uk/doc_lib/69_1_real_aid.pdf ).