The UN estimates the infrastructure development costs in
the Asian Pacific to be in excess of $1.7 trillion USD over the next 30 years.
This estimate raises a raft of questions not only about how this figure was
arrived at but where, how and in what context this money is to be spent.
Throughout the Asia Pacific are clear concerns over sovereign debt levels and
the impact of foreign asset ownership. With debt to loan repayment levels
standing at a ratio of 1.2 : 1 the impact on the lives of the urban and rural
poor are often ignored by wealthy nations seeking to promote their soft
diplomacy and Climate Change agendas. Development agendas are always argued to
reflect the host nation’s development objectives. What is entirely unclear
however is whether these development agendas reflect the objectives of the
national government or the state and regional authorities? In a large number of
cases regional development agendas receive international donor funding approval
via special interest groups lobbying for these funds. Often these groups are
aligned with key individuals in government and business who will directly
benefit. As a consequence we are witnessing an arrogant abuse of authority
ensuring the repeat of the same development mistakes many accuse previous government
officials of.
Even though a raft of checks and balances exist in
the development finance sector, we continue to see the approval of projects
that are handpicked by donor countries and industry insiders with little regard
for their broader social and economic impact. Project design and all aspects of
project management are calculated to ignore future debt obligations that might
lower the gulf between rich and poor. Development banking institution from the
World Bank through to regional banking and NGO finance institutions are simply
incapable of designing appropriate loan mechanisms for integrated projects,
enabling the broadest social and economic benefit at the lowest debt to equity
ratio even when
they acknowledge the problems with current
approaches.
Let’s
put this into some perspective! Infrastructure
aid and development needs in the Asia Pacific have been estimated
at 1.7 trillion USD without accounting for
specific Climate Change adaptation needs. If the developed world would make all
these funds available tomorrow, the combined Asia Pacific debt; including all
outstanding loans and excluding loan default or other contingency banking
arrangements; would exceed 31 trillion USD by 2050. There is little doubt that
vast sways of community leaders and activists have a point when they argue that
development finance mechanisms deployed by the wealthy nations through powerful
global bureaucracies such as the UN are little more than the vanguard of a new
type of economic imperialism designed to maintain the existing international
order. A large part of the problem rests with the type of development finance
and social impact finance methodology deployed. Irrespective of whether a top
down or bottom up development strategy is recommended, the macro economic
analysis contextualizes the nature of the specific problem within a national
straight jacket of assumptions that are presented as desirable outcomes.
Invariably people are asking whether these assumptions realistically meet the
desired objectives of the communities whose lives the development projects
target. Questions are increasingly being raised about the ethical, cultural and
social principles these aims are meant to improve for who, what, where and when
and at who’s cost. Many of the reports highlight GDP agendas in the context of
governance, income tax reform and local institutional reforms without
questioning whether the idea of increasing indirect taxes and government
charges coupled with privatizing transport, water, electricity, health and
education services is in the long term development interest of the most
marginal nations in the Asia Pacific. Despite ample evidence in both the
developed and the emerging world that this approach increases private household
debt, this traditional macro-economic methodology to development financing
continues to persist.
It is clear that the traditional narrow formal training economists
receive is part and parcel of the problem. Unable to think outside the box
these people write the same old rubbish reports and slavishly cite statistics
to support their own preconceived ideas of what developing nations need and
want. Perhaps more intriguingly is that the assumptions that underpin the
methodology of these reports highlight a single unified pathway to development
that mirrors western thinking without recognizing that 21st century
technology offers a vastly different way of inclusive development then was
previously thought possible. This is precisely where the new battlegrounds
are. We should not be under the illusion that the emerging economies of
the Asia Pacific have to follow the same 18th and 19th century
economic development model of the west. Modern technology allows us to
leapfrog much of these outdated ideas with innovative and culturally
appropriate development methods without destroying the very community fabric
that makes these nations the vibrant historic and culturally unique societies
they are.
In the Asia Pacific local community leaders are anxious
over a new type of economic colonialism as rural landownership, affordable
housing, social welfare, jobs, education and health become battlefields in the
growing divide between rich and poor. Invariably the reports blame the economic
development problems in transport, housing, energy, water, sanitation and
health infrastructure on the readiness of the institutions to design, plan and
manage the western funded projects to a standard acceptable to the western
donors. Blaming poor levels of governance and low levels of accountability on
national and regional institutions in the Asia Pacific whilst approving loans
to the very people international financiers are critical of seems an entirely
pointless prattle. Influential businessmen and politicians are forever building
monuments to themselves in an effort to enrich themselves and grow their
spheres of influence. Mugabe is exempt from prosecution for years of
incompetence and theft. There is no doubt that the embedded
commercial interests underpinning the aims of soft diplomacy in the international aid and development finance
sectors drive the interests of the developed world at the expense of ordinary
people in the emerging nations of Africa, Latin America and the Asia Pacific.
Recent trade disputes between the US and China merely reflect the tip of the
underlying socio-economic problems with international agreements. Ignoring
local customs and values in favour of trade agreements that will inevitably
depend on the subsidy arrangements of the host country is something no
government should willingly agree to. Poor nations are aware that their
relative advantages in labour and other resource costs must be balanced against
disparities in education, environmental degradation, land ownership, population
displacement as well as the costs to health and the loss of social and
community identity.
The future urban
ghetto’s in Kolkata comprise of high rise developments constructed on farm
land, wetlands and swamps that used to drain the Ganges into the Bay of Bengal.
Roads and building foundations are not designed to cope with heavy monsoons or
Climate Change. Daytime summer temperatures frequently exceed 45 degrees
Celsius.
Displaced rural
workers migrate into the city for low paid construction jobs. They often live
in the unfinished buildings without basic sanitation or clean drinking water.
Children washing
themselves in the back streets of Balia
At the heart of these problems
are perceptions of empowerment and alienation. Invariably these matters
coalesce with local traditions, culture, religion and ethnic mores that find
expression in unique and sometimes violent nationalistic sentiments. Creating
sustainable urban and rural environments that nourish and support local
communities whilst providing access to economic participation often involve
political choices that are difficult to reconcile. Conventional liberalist
thinking pushes a raft of agendas that have evolved little from the master and
servant arrangements of the Middle Ages. Some would go as far as to say that
modern day slavery is merely hidden behind a veiled façade of privilege, inherited wealth and
institutionalised corruption. Others point out that each age in human evolution
has given rise to new heroes who against overwhelming odds battled the
establishment in order to carve out a new future for themselves and their
followers. Today we worship Bill Gates and Elon Musk. It was not so long ago
people talked of Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Napoleon and the great
Chinese dynasties. Just as we have commodified the great leaders of the past we
institutionalize the leaders of tomorrow. The disgusting immorality of this
trend is that we have outsourced personal responsibility and accountability to
a self-serving behemoth known only as the bureaucratic machine and its
political masters.
Electricity and
communications infrastructure in rural India
Wiring
standards, safety and compliance are not on the agenda here.
There is of course
logic behind the denationalization of control. Hiding decision making processes
behind a wall of labyrinthine procedure and unfathomable processes is all about
maintaining standards of equity and fairness whilst enabling compliance through
rule based enforcement. This arrangement has, we are told, always been
considered as the most rational organizational principle for all complex human
organizations. A homogenized and pasteurized sausage factory for the masses to
chew on and stew over provides ample fodder for disagreement and hopefully
little chance for collective action. Unlike Pacific Island communities who can
often wait for years until a true village leader emerges, we prefer to elect or
nominate our representatives from those willing to apply for the job. As a
consequence, modern societies are riddled with people who are prepared to put
their own interests before those of the community they are employed to serve.
Self-interest is perhaps the most powerful instinct of any living organism.
Other components to this subset are survival and procreation. All living
organisms deploy strategies for space, mating rights and all other resources
needed for individual survival. These strategies can include any type of
co-operative arrangement as well as competition in every form.
Social housing
in Cebu Philippines is often constructed with poorly planned road access on
land little more than 1 meter above sea level. Housing construction methods as
well as building and planning codes are ignored or subject to bribery from
government contracted developers. During heavy rains the sewage mixes with road
drainage flowing out of the manhole covers into the streets.
All our great
cities exist because of the collective needs
of the people that chose to live there. The need for shelter, security and
commerce remains an evolutionary imprint we do not seem to be able to escape
from. No matter how hard we try to remove ourselves from the immediate
nastiness of what this may entail, we are increasingly confronted
by the compromises we need to make. This is true
whether we look at problems of housing affordability, cost of living, or the
health and welfare for ourselves and our families.
By 2050 our small planet will host more than 41 mega cities with inhabitants of 10 million people or more.
Most of us are acutely aware that greater urban densities, rural migration, homelessness, urban congestion, crime
and Climate Change will make these places a nightmare on earth. The motivations
that caused humans to congregate in collective communities for security in the
past are no longer a valid reason for living in
large urban centres. Karachi
has more than six hundred assassin for hire. 80%
of their business derives from political assassinations with the rest attributed to the Karachi mafia. Entire
neighbourhoods in the US
are gang controlled and theft, graft, rape
and many other crimes riddle major
cities in the developing as well as the
developed world. This does not have to be the legacy we bestow to our children
and grandchildren.
Communities are
living organisms. Like all living organisms they must have the freedom and the
rights to manage and control their own collective needs. This is true
irrespective of whether we are talking about a remote island or a neighbourhood
in one of our great cities. Every successful urban renewal or rural development
project respects these fundamental aspects of shared responsibility implied by
this statement. Modern technology combined with strong local community
representation supported by proper planning, zoning and building codes can
transform the urban ghettos of today into the liveable cities of tomorrow. It
can transform rural poverty into vibrant self-sustaining communities halting
the breakdown of families and the relentless migration in search for jobs and
greater economic security. The key to achieving this is to move away from large
scale infrastructure planning and embrace the concepts of small scale,
distributed development solutions that are customized and integrated to
specific community needs.
Enormous sums are
spent on E-WASH-E ( energy, water, sanitation, health and education)
initiatives every year. Add to that the disaster and emergency relief funds
collected by the many NGO’s and it becomes increasingly plain that the
accountability and effectiveness for the expenditure of these vast sums are
increasingly questioned. The question is not how do we spend money on soft
diplomacy more effectively but how do we spend money more appropriately? How do
we ensure economic development impacts evenly on all levels of the community
without cultural and social dislocation and without increasing the divide
between rich and poor? In a world where trickledown economics seems to dominate
rationalist economic thought these notions are perhaps unfathomable left wing
utopian ideals best enshrined as principles we should aspire to rather than act
upon. This is precisely the problem! Instead of spending a $1 to fix the
problem our institutional banking guru’s prefer to spend $1 without
comprehending the entirely avoidable consequences the expenditure of this $1
creates. Let us look at a specific example!
The Republic of the Marshall Islands is designated as one of the 50 at
risk and 23 at critical 'Need nations' by the UN. The atolls that comprise this
Pacific nation are typical of the many island nations to the north of Australia
with perhaps several key distinctions. Firstly, the country is the site of US
nuclear experimentation. As a result, the island’s government and people are
still fighting for full compensation from the US government. Secondly, the coral
atolls are little more than 1 meter above sea level. This will make the entire
population of the Marshall Islands the first man made Climate Change refugees
unless the rest of the world will make Climate Action a reality now. Thirdly,
without any land for agricultural production, the economy of the Marshall’s is
entirely import dependent for its food, energy and all other materials. Despite
a small banking services industry the country is dependent on selling its
fishing rights to Taiwan, Japan, Russia and other nations. A small merchant
maritime service sector provides the only other industry that provides income
to a population living with chronic diabetes, high unemployment and a raft of
avoidable health problems.
As a consequence
there is no properly planned WASH infrastructure. What exists has been
constructed and is maintained by foreign companies who for some reason have
managed to procure contracts in line with their donor country’s foreign aid
policy. You will find that Majuro’s main water supply is the airport runway.
There is no municipal planning or building code that requires rainwater storage
to be mandated for each building on the island as part of a standard building
approval process.
Instead of
building a faecal and bio-waste to energy plant the only sewage treatment
facility on Majuro operates on diesel pumps without any bio-digestion capacity.
Sewage sludge is piled behind a series of storage vats near the main part of
town. During high tides, or when the diesel powered electricity grid fails, raw
sewage is released into the lagoon used by the local children ( see picture
above). The subsequent health issues are something every visitor to the island
is warned of in a casual conversation over turkey tail soup. Instead of
recycling grey water and reprocessing sewage sludge into fertilizer, the increasing
frequency of dry weather spells leaves the few raised garden beds filled with
imported potting mix around town struggling in the salt laden coral
rubble that forms the top soil on Majuro.
There are a few
remaining breadfruit and coconut palms not covered with concrete and asphalt.
They barely survive the harsh conditions. Despite the government’s food
security agenda few coordinated solutions exist. Tourism is the only other
option that seems to be on the agenda for a government looking for answers to a
growing debt to GDP ratio. However, when a country can’t even process its own
sewage into fertilizer and redirect its grey water into raised garden beds, the
idea of growing something as simple as a few herbs is unlikely to attract
foreign visitors other than the most committed diving enthusiasts.
There are clear and simple answers that can be implemented with a little
planning and foresight. The problem is as always that development money for
integrated project solutions and the training of local staff disappears with
the next consultant and foreign adviser appointment. Somehow these people are
forever pushing the agenda of a company interested in a plush contract
sponsored by the donor country. Urgent funding in appropriate planning and
construction standards and infrastructure compliance governance remain ignored.
The idea of implementing project management standards and compliance codes run
contrary to the agendas of the donor agencies and the companies interested in
securing the contract. Even the idea of integrated solar and small scale wind
generators to reduce the country’s diesel import bill is largely left to donor
nations who take advantage of cultural traditions by gifting a few solar panels
in return for prominent signage, the extension of commercial fishing rights and
a generous tax deal.
It is true that much
of the governance issues in the Pacific rest with the traditional authority
structures. Government has always been run and management by a few prominent
families. The Marshall Islands are no different in this respect. This does not
mean that foreign companies who have installed themselves as preferred
suppliers of services with their donor nations must exploit their preferred
status by constructing substandard infrastructure and devising idiotic
solutions to relatively simple engineering problems. In Australia's case the
systematic outsourcing of DFAT ( Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade )
functions to four external consulting firms poses a serious accountability and
value for money contradiction.
Where are the Australian and US Universities who could be engaged in
substantial Climate Change, oceanographic, agricultural and environmental
research, local training and knowledge exchange programs? Where are the diploma
and undergraduate exchange programs in urban and rural planning, transport,
civil engineering, building and construction? What we have instead are basic
education and training solutions Australian companies organize with DFAT under
contract. No one seems to have informed DFAT that the inappropriate primary and
secondary school support, including the standard automotive and other basic
TAFE training programs have not cut the mustard for 20 years. It took me 2
hours to discover that the Australian company offering education and training consultancy
services is so incompetent in structuring any education and training
consultancy / advisory service contract in the Pacific, that it can’t write an
international consultancy proposal correctly. Even the idea of teaching basic
construction techniques are a bit droll for an Island nation likely to suffer
from cyclones and tsunamis. Instead of building cinder block structures on tiny
coral islands, flood proof social housing should be constructed on pontoons and
pylons in Majuro’s lagoon. This would leave the available land clear for raised
garden beds filled with fruit trees and vegetables. Not that this idea is
ever going to receive any serious financing before sea level rises claim the
Marshall Islands for good.
The scarcity of
arable land in the Marshall Islands requires innovative solutions. These
solutions must by necessity not include covering the few acres of coral atoll
with concrete slabs for housing only to see the housing washed away in the next
king tide. Someone might even think of importing a few bee hives to help the
only guy trying to grow a few tomatoes in his green house. The fact that DFAT
employs a company to design education and training support packages for the
Pacific without bothering to check whether this company is actually qualified
to offer qualified advice to the government of Pacific Nations continues to
amaze and disgust me. But then again DFAT employs a senior diplomat who used to
lobby for the coal industry in Delhi and who is now pushing a gas power agenda in
the Pacific.
Many of the most basic education and training pathways programs for
local youth are simply ignored. Adult education is simply not even mentioned.
As a consequence the chain of respect and leadership passed down from
grandparents and parents breaks down in these traditional societies. This
causes social dislocation, community disharmony and eventually families will
fragment and migrate to the US or elsewhere. The old people know that the life
style of the young is killing them. The women know improvements in local fresh produce
production will assist in the reduction of diabetes and related health issues.
Instead of being a nation known for having the worst diet on the planet, a
simple process of improving local fresh food production will benefit the
promotion of tourism. This in turn will promote improvements in hospitality
education and service standards. Perhaps someone might even learn how to set a
hotel dining room table properly.
What the majority of
ADB economists and advisers simply don’t get is that funding for infrastructure
projects begins and ends with a properly articulated development plan that
includes and requires ownership of this plan by the local community. Spending a
few million dollars on a sewage plant built by a foreign company to outdated
specifications that will fail when the generators are off line is simply a
waste of ADB ( Asian Development Bank) money. Improving the electricity
infrastructure by changing a diesel generating infrastructure to gas is a
pointless exercise no matter which DFAT and ADB consultant promotes it. What
the boffins at the ADB and other development banking institutions don’t seem to
comprehend is that no one in the Pacific cares about Australia’s addiction to
gas. No one wants to be dependent on Australia’s gas exports. So devising an
ADB energy development policy that ignores the Paris Climate Convention defies
standard banking risk analysis protocols.
For those of you not
familiar with the Paris Agreement let me put it in black and white for you. The
Paris agreement states that no knew coal fired power stations are to be
approved beyond 2017. No new gas fired power stations can be built beyond 2030
if we are to remain within the agreed global temperature range. The integrated
E-WASH-E infrastructure focus for all Asia Pacific, Caribbean, Latin American
and African nations is an integrated solar/ wind / tidal and wave generation
profile optioned on a base load sewage sludge / bio-mass / bio-gas digester
backbone with suitable energy storage configuration in a standalone smart grid.
The fact that ADB internal as well as external senior consultancy thinking is
not even on the same page puts ADB loan management for any Pacific Island
nation into serious risk management territory. Why would any economist worth
his salt even suggest such a silly diesel for gas substitution idea when in 10
years the entire gas energy project will have to be torn down anyway? That is
unless the host country has not gone broke paying for the gas imports from
Australia before that happens! Alas, that is the nature of development politics.
Waste and incompetence are dictated by the foreign policy agendas of the donor
nations.
No comments:
Post a Comment