Post 2015: Global Action for an Inclusive and Sustainable Future

While SSc is not new, it has received renewed
attention due to changing geopolitical realities
(chaturvedi et al., 2012). the rise of ‘new’ donors
may be seen as the mirror image of a new system of
global governance in which countries like brazil,
china, and India are increasingly influential
(Grimm et al., 2009). the potential contribution of
SSc will be an important element of any post-2015
global framework that seeks universal relevance.
Opportunities for SSC to contribute
to development
While all elements of SSc could contribute to a
post-2015 framework, this section focuses on the
aid component. the lack of official figures makes it
difficult to isolate the level of oDa-type resources
in SSc. rough estimates suggest that emerging
economies provide about $15 billion in aid each
year and that this could potentially rise to over
$50 billion by 2025 (Kharas and rogerson, 2012).
between 2005 to 2010 India’s foreign assistance
spending grew by around 11% to $680 million
and china’s by around 24% to $3.9 billion (Global
Health Strategies initiatives, 2012).
Since the adoption of the mDGs, traditional
donors have tended to focus on social sectors such
as health, education and social protection rather than
on productive sectors. In contrast, SSc has invested
mostly in infrastructure development and investment
in the productive sector (Kragelund, 2011). In nepal,
for instance, infrastructure development such as
roads, bridges and hydro-power is the key area of
SSc support. of total Southern aid in 2011, 39.5%
was allocated to roads, 31.7% to the power sector and
14.5% in irrigation, while social sectors constituted
13.7% (nepal case study).
aid-recipient countries also consider that SSc
comes with fewer policy-related conditions than
traditional oDa, thus providing more ownership
and policy space (united nations, 2010). Following
the principle of ‘non-interference’, SSc tends not to
be conditional on the adoption of policies regarding
governance, or economic and institutional reform.
Fewer ‘conditionalities’ allow national governments
greater policy space. In côte d’Ivoire, for example,
Southern donors were more flexible than traditional
donors in continuing their support during the
political crisis and imposed fewer conditions (côte
d’Ivoire case study – Kouadio et al., 2013). although
SSc may not come with policy-related conditions,
it is often earmarked and provided in the form of
in-kind grants or loans for projects or technical
cooperation that are tied to purchases from the
providing country. Yet, in nepal, where technology
transfer is a keenly felt need, Southern technology is
often preferred because of the low costs of transfer
and fast diffusion and adaptation (nepal case study).
the countries providing SSc can also share their
own recent development experiences. unctaD’s
Least Developed Countries Report 2011, for
instance, argues that SSc may be more likely to
support and encourage state-building efforts
because of shared development experiences and
objectives (unctaD, 2011). Such support could
be in the form of capacity-building and sharing of
policy lessons, which could help partner countries
to create instruments and institutions to develop
their productive capacities in ways that promote
structural transformation, employment generation
and poverty reduction.
Challenges for SSC to contribute
to development
a notable challenge is the lack of transparency
about SSc volumes and activities. transparency is
a precondition for evaluating external development
assistance (Easterly and pfutze, 2008), in the
absence of which it is hard to determine the impact
of SSc. traditional oDa is characterised by
inefficiencies, overlaps and high transaction costs
on all sides, partly due to inadequate transparency.
For SSc, part of the issue is to better account for its
various components. It characteristically consists of
aid and non-aid components and the mix between
concessional and non-concessional funding often
poSt-2015: Global actIon For an IncluSIvE anD SuStaInablE FuturE
Estimates suggest
that emerging
economies
provide about
$15 billion in aid
each year and
that this could
potentially rise to
over $50 billion
by 2025.
115