‘Our Aid’: UK International Development Policy under the Coalition
| Author | David Hall-Matthews,Molly Dunne,Simon Lightfoot |
| Published date | 01 April 2011 |
| Date | 01 April 2011 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-9066.2011.00057.x |
| Subject Matter | Feature |
then, Britain has also taken a lead-
ing role in numerous international
agreements concerned with develop-
ment, in particular the G8 summit at
Gleneagles, which pledged to double
aid to Africa and significantly reduce
bilateral debt.
The coalition government gener-
ally has accepted the increased level
of importance assigned to interna-
tional development by the Labour
administration. The decision to ring
fence and even increase spending
on international development at a
time when every other government
department, except health, was
facing huge cuts in their budgets
generated plenty of headlines. The
commitment to spend 0.7 per cent
of GNI on overseas development as-
sistance (ODA) by 2013, enshrined
in law, is a significant step, given that
in 2009 the figure was around 0.52
per cent and only a limited number
of countries had reached this level.
However, it is worth noting that if
GNI goes down, as some expect it
to, then the actual spend need not
increase that much. The coalition
also agreed on the need to maintain
DFID as an independent government
department separate from the For-
eign Office. Finally there was sup-
port to ensure that aid was directed
to providing the most basic of needs
to those living in poverty.
‘Our Aid’:
UK International Development Policy
under the Coalition
While the Con–Lib coalition
has cut spending right
across government, the
international development budget
is one of only two areas to be for-
mally ring fenced. Indeed, spend-
ing on international development
will need to increase if the target
to spend 0.7 per cent of gross na-
tional income (GNI) on aid is to be
achieved. The decision to increase
aid in 2012–13 has, unsurprisingly,
prompted much debate about the
wisdom of increasing aid while cut-
ting, say, the defence budget. The
UK aid budget, in particular where
‘our money’ is spent and what it
is spent on, is therefore under the
spotlight as never before.
Context of UK Aid
The establishment of the Depart-
ment for International Development
(DFID) as a separate government
department by the Labour govern-
ment in 1997 was a significant move,
which helped to place development
higher on the national agenda. Prior
to the establishment of DFID, issues
relating to international develop-
ment had been dealt with by the
Overseas Development Agency,
which formed part of the Foreign
and Commonwealth Office. Since
The coalition’s decision to ring fence international development spending has focused
attention on the UK aid budget. How much does Britain really spend on aid? And why has
international development remained high on the political agenda? Molly Dunne, David Hall-
Matthews and Simon Lightfoot investi gate.
Where does UK Aid Go?
In 2009/10, out of the overall DFID
budget, £4 billion was spent in 90
countries through bilateral pro-
grammes. The top 20 recipients of
DFID bilateral aid accounted for 83
per cent of the bilateral aid budget,
with the top three recipients of net
bilateral ODA in 2009 being India,
Ethiopia and Afghanistan (see Ta-
ble 1). In addition, £2.5 billion was
spent via multilateral organisations,
TABLE 1 Top 10 recipients of DFID
bilateral aid 2008/09
Country £ m
India 295
Ethiopia 214
Afghanistan 133
Bangladesh 149
Tanzania 144
Pakistan 140
Nigeria 114
Sudan 146
Kenya 103
Ghana 90
Source: DFID, Statist ics on Interna tional
Development: 2005/06–2009/10.
Britain has
played a
leading role
in numerous
international
development
agreements
29April 2011
To continue reading
Request your trial