Short term aid
|
People will give freely in a
disaster this gives them a feel good factor
|
It costs money and uses up
technical expertise and technology in the short term.
This means that a donor countries
resources are lost to the recipient country for a short period
of time
It costs the tax payer in the
donor country money
|
Short term aid gives help which
can save lives immediately
Short term aid can develop into
long term aid after a disaster, as people in MEDCs realise how
poor people are in the affected zone.
|
Reduces the receiving country's
ability to produce the items they get from us (i.e. if we send
them short term food aid, then their farmers wont be able to
sell their crops
for higher prices)
|
Long term aid
|
Companies and individuals find
satisfying and well paid work overseas
Trade may continue into the
future after the initial stimulus of aid
It engenders good will towards
the donor country and enhances its International reputation
Aid can also be a good way of
forming strong relationships with other countries; curb
terrorism and gain political will for global issues and deals
but these are in the purest sense of aid not its purpose.
It can boost employment in large
industries in the donor countries in arms manufacturers and
construction industries particularly.
|
It costs the tax payer of the
donor countries often those citizens wonder why their money is
going to foreign countries.
|
New industries can develop which
improves peoples chances of getting skills and long term
employment
It can lead to improvements in
long term farming methods introducing new crops and better
land management practises
Trade with the donor country may
continue into the future
Schools, hospitals, roads, dams
and other infrastructure projects improve the lives of many
people and will last for a long time
|
Some foreign aid is given as
military and weapons gifts, potentially fanning the flames of
global wars instead of dealing with them
Tied aid can make the recipient
countries reliant on the donor country
The senior posts created by the
aid are often given to foreigners as local people do not have
the necessary skills for those jobs
The funding for big projects is
often just for the construction (e.g. of a hospital) but may not
cover the long term maintenance costs for the recipient country
Local people can lose their land
to large projects such as dams
|
Top-down aid
|
It feels controlled for the
donor country as it is coordinated by the actual government or
International Organisations such as the UK
It allows for LARGE SCALE
planning over large areas without having to worry about every
Individuals needs
|
Large scale projects can use up
huge amounts of money that donor countries may feel are wasted
Corruption and the theft of aid
has happened in the past, this makes donor countries less likely
to give money to big top down projects
|
Projects aim to solve large
scale problems in
a recipient country so are well
coordinated and backed by money
Large scale projects such as
dams and superhighways improve the national infrastructure for
the majority of people
|
Big projects are capital
intensive and poor countries may have to add more money to the
aid given to ensure that the projects are completed.
Large scale projects are often
part of TIED aid, where the LEDC has to either pay back loans or
allow richer countries access to its resources.
Projects often less sustainable,
consuming large amounts of time, land and resources
|
Bottom up aid
|
More individuals in Donor
countries are likely to give to Bottom up aid as it is organised
by charities and gives a feel good factor
Many bottom up charities have a
direct link between the individual donor and the recipient
through sponsorship, letter writing and websites
|
Lots of the money collected in
richer donor nations by charities gets swallowed up by
advertising and collection costs, and therefore never reaches
the destination recipient country.
|
NGOs work with the recipient
communities, gathering their ideas before starting projects
Local people are involved in
Bottom up aid and projects are democratic
Less money is lost to corruption
Projects tend to be more
sustainable
|
Less reliable, in times of
recession people give less to charities.
Often lacks coordination, with
many charities competing in the same areas, so is therefore
inefficient in delivering whole sale change to countries and
regions
|