This is cross-posted from Think Progress’ Wonk Room.
……….

It’s hard keeping up with the avalanche of inaccuracies and misinformation coming from Dambisa Moyo, the Zambian-born banker turned aid critic and now author of “Dead Aid.” You can see the growing catalogue that ONE has compiled here.

Yesterday, we caught wind of a Q and A she did with Fast Company magazine where she confirmed what we’ve long suspected: that Moyo has little understanding of the health and poverty fighting programs she routinely criticizes. This time it was PEPFAR, the US anti-AIDS program, which has put over 2 million Africans on life-saving treatment. Here’s what she had to say:

Let’s talk about Pepfar. They’ve increased it to $30 billion for 15 countries. Say every country roughly gets $2 billion. Zambia has 10 million people, so that’s roughly $200 a person. That’s approximately the per-capita income of Zambia — you’re roughly doubling the per capita income. But that has had no meaningful impact on the health sector. $2 billion and you can’t overhaul the system? That seems to me completely absurd. African governments have completely abdicated their responsibility.

If Ms. Moyo had any basic knowledge of the program – or had done a simple Google search — she’d know that last summer the U.S. Congress approved $39 billion in funding over five years for HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis programs under both PEPFAR and the Geneva-based Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB and Malaria. Together, these two programs fund projects in over 137 countries.

PEPFAR is not a perfect program and its supporters have historically been its loudest critics, but no one with any basic knowledge of the program would doubt its groundbreaking (and lifesaving) achievements in just five years. By the end of 2008, PEPFAR was supporting treatment for more than 2 million people in Africa; care for more than 10 million people with HIV worldwide, including more than 4 million orphans and vulnerable children; and providing antiretroviral treatment for pregnant women, allowing nearly 240,000 infants to be born HIV free.

Furthermore, consider that just 10 years ago it cost $10,000 per person per year to treat a patient with AIDS. Treatment is now available for $140 per person per year, a breathtaking improvement in efficiency.

Moyo goes on to say that only a fifth of PEPFAR money reaches the ground.

The dollar amount [of PEPFAR] that hits the individual is 20 cents on the dollar if you’re lucky.

We tend to agree with Ms. Moyo that not enough aid money is hitting the ground, but her suggestion that only 20 cents on the dollar in PEPFAR money is hitting the ground has no basis that we are aware of. We challenge Ms. Moyo to provide evidence of her assertion. Where is the evidence? Rather than making up numbers and misleading the public, we wish Ms Moyo would join us in supporting the new aid transparency initiative we’re backing called Publish What You Fund.

Moyo’s comments would be laughable if the subject matter wasn’t AIDS and the question wasn’t whether the United States and others should continue these successful, life saving programs.

-Ben Hubbard, Chief of Staff, ONE

In today’s Washington Post, Michael Gerson offers a largely critical review of Dambisa Moyo’s book Dead Aid. Accusing the book of pushing “the envelope of absurdity” Gerson claims that under Moyo’s proposal, “many now alive would be dead.”

Excerpts below, full piece here. You can read more about this Hot Topic here.

Moyo is on firm ground in criticizing decades of direct foreign assistance to African governments. Such aid has often propped up corrupt elites, shielded leaders from the consequences of their own incompetence and delayed reforms necessary for the development of working markets. She is correct in emphasizing the decisive role of trade, direct foreign investment and local capital in the development of poor nations — sources of opportunity that dwarf aid flows in size and importance.

But Moyo does not take sufficient account of the broad reaction against this kind of direct aid beginning in the 1990s. The United States started taking a much more targeted and strategic approach. The Millennium Challenge Account directed new aid to nations willing to work as responsible partners, dedicated to reform and transparency. Initiatives on AIDS and malaria required and achieved measurable outcomes and have often worked through civil society instead of giving money directly to African governments.

But it is perhaps for the best that Moyo did not write on these issues, because she knows little about them. Referring to America’s AIDS program, she states: “In 2005, the United States pledged US $15 billion over five years to fight AIDS (mainly through the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief). . . . But this had strings attached. Two-thirds of the money had to go to pro-abstinence programmes.” The year of the pledge was 2003. And last year about one-thirteenth of the program was dedicated to both abstinence and marital faithfulness programs. It is not a small thing for an economist to be off by a factor of nine. And it is not a minor thing for Moyo to dismiss and distort the achievements of a foreign aid program that helped save her homeland of Zambia from social and economic ruin. In 2004, 7 percent of Zambians who needed AIDS drugs were receiving them. By September, that figure should exceed 66 percent. AIDS drugs, admittedly, do not guarantee economic growth. But I suspect that a generation of hopeless mass death would have undermined Zambia’s economic prospects.

If Moyo’s point is that some aid can be bad, then it is noncontroversial. If her point is that all aid is bad, then it is absurd. The productive political agenda is to increase the good while decreasing the bad. The productive academic debate is distinguishing between them.

-Chris Scott

The Huffington Post is running a piece by Dr. Alex G. Coutinho critiquing Dambisa Moyo’s book Dead Aid. You can follow our coverage of this Hot Topic here.

Excerpts below, full piece here
………

Africa’s problems are predominantly those of a systematic failure to harness the full potential of its people. Countries that first invest in their people by educating them, protecting their health and providing opportunities inside and outside their countries are those countries that have progressed, with stable economies, a higher GDP and “happiness factor.” In addition countries like India and China have huge internal markets which give these countries considerable insulation from export-driven economic vagaries.

Africa needs to focus on social development — health, education and job creation, while at the same time developing its production capacities and as large an internal market as possible. The other necessary ways forward are, of course, visionary leadership, eradication of corruption, good stewardship of natural resources and, for a while at least, management of Africa’s burgeoning population till generated resources can support larger populations.

I do share the same aspiration for a prosperous Africa that is not dependent on crumbs from the rich. Nonetheless we are now in an interconnected global economy and global destiny and the solutions to underdevelopment do include aid — albeit aid that is linked to social welfare and development, rather than aid to build up armies or aid in return for mortgaging the natural wealth of a country to another “model” development partner.

………

-Chris Scott

Strive Masiyiwa is chairman and founder of Econet Group, as well as one of Time Magazine’s most influential people in 2002. He offers the following response to Dambisa Moyo’s new book “Dead Aid.” You can read more on this Hot Topic here.
……………….

There was a time when as a businessman, I used to think of donor AID in much the same way as Ms. Moyo. For me I thought all we needed to solve the problems in Africa was to teach people to be entrepreneurs; to end corruption and waste by governments; get better leadership, and so forth. And yes I saw aid as part of the problem. Then one day about 20 years ago, I attended a funeral of an employee who had died of HIV/AIDS. He left behind a dying wife, and three little children. I was forced to look after those children because there was no one else to help. Within a matter of months, I had over 40 children in my care through similar circumstances! I soon realized that we had a disaster on our hands, and that I had to do something, which went beyond orphans of my own employees. This is when my wife and I set up a foundation we call the Capernaum Trust, through which we provide assistance to more than 26,000 orphans.

Through my involvement with this foundation, which is funded entirely by us, as Africans, I have also come into contact with many donor organizations from outside Africa, and their work. I have worked with them on all types of programs to help the poor and most vulnerable right across Africa. I have seen many good programs, and I have also seen many bad ones, and there is no doubt that there are many things that can be done to improve some of these programs. But, let me say this, quite categorically, the biggest disaster you can create is to end donor aid in Africa, until you have an alternative, that is better, and has been tested on the ground.

As for the views that I held before I got INVOLVED, at a personal level, it was not that they were wrong, it is just that INVOLVEMENT, helps you to get a better perspective on reality. And nothing is ever that simple.

-Strive Masiyiwa, Chairman and Founder: Econet Group

A post by Edith Jibunoh, cross-posted from Aid Watch

At ONE, we agree a vigorous public debate is needed on how best to combat extreme poverty in Africa, but your post suggesting ONE is trying to “discredit” and “misrepresent” Ms. Moyo is untrue and not particularly constructive. As anyone who goes to our website site can see, we aren’t trying to discredit her, we are responding, substantively, to her arguments. You suggest we aren’t addressing the merits of her proposals, but the first item we posted on our site was a seven page point-counter-point addressing the merits of her proposals. This document clearly lays out where we disagree with the arguments she is making.

In terms of the emails you refer to, yes, we emailed people in Africa who we work with to see what they thought, as many are involved directly with aid-funded initiatives. Their experience is very relevant in thinking through the impact of Ms. Moyo’s claims. So it wasn’t an attempt to shut a conversation down, but an effort to open one up. And it’s succeeded! We’ve also been in a direct and ongoing conversation with Ms. Moyo, before and after the book’s release. Our concerns are no surprise to her. We agree with your concerns about aid transparency and, as you know, we recently helped launch “publish what you fund”, an aid transparency effort. We share the goal of “asking that aid benefit the poor” (as you write on your website) and we campaign to ensure that it does.

Mr. Easterly, there is another thing we agree on: let’s make this a thoughtful and constructive discussion about the best policy for Africa. In that spirit, it would be good to know if you join Ms. Moyo in her belief that all aid to Africa (with the exception of humanitarian aid following emergencies) should be cut off in five years, and that Africans would not suffer as a result. As just one example, what do you think would happen to the 2 million Africans now on ARVs, funded by aid?

Lest you think we are misrepresenting Ms. Moyo’s point of view on what aid should be exempted, see her own words below to Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
……………

ABC News Foreign Correspondent: Is Aid Killing Africa?
Reporter: Philip Williams
Broadcast: 17/03/2009

WILLIAMS: And you’re absolutely confident that removing that aid is not going to leave at least some people without food and medicine?

MOYO: I think the ones that will be effected most will probably be the African elite as opposed to the broader population.

WILLIAMS: What will they lose?

MOYO: I think they will lose possibly their bank accounts in Geneva in the worst-case scenario. But, I think beyond that they would also lose the ability to have leisure time and they’ll be required to actually go out and start to work hard to find money to support their social programs in Africa.

WILLIAMS: If you cut off aid within 5 years, surely that’s going to leave millions of people without the support they are now dependent on – food aid, medical aid – aid that really keeps people alive.

MOYO: I don’t believe that’s the case. Most Africans do not see any of the aid that you are alluding to. It’s…. again, their best case scenario on some projects is 20 cents in the dollar that actually makes it to an African – and that’s best case. Effectively, if we continue down this path, we will have many more Africans living in poverty in many… in a few years to come, and that is really the problem – that there are no jobs coming out of an aid model.

-Edith Jibunoh, Africa Outreach Manager

Mr. Easterly’s original post can be found here.

I would like to address some of the concerns raised in the blog about an email on Dead Aid that we sent to a small number of people who we have worked with in Africa. I’d also like to flesh out our thoughts on the book – what we agree with and what we don’t. We welcome this debate about the book and more broadly about the role aid has to play in combating poverty in Africa.

In terms of the email, my colleague Tyler Denton contacted Iris Mwanza, who he met on a trip to Zambia last year, to ask if she wanted to comment on the book and on how she has seen aid working in Zambia, particularly given that she oversees an AIDS program funded by US aid. Why did he do that? Dambisa is saying that aid doesn’t actually reach people in Africa and they would not suffer if it were cut off. We know that is not true. We could simply state our belief and back it up by verifiable statistics, but we thought it would be more impactful to hear from people working on the ground in Africa who could speak to their personal experiences with aid. It wasn’t an attempt to shut a conversation down, but an effort to open one up. And that’s succeeded! We welcome a vigorous debate on the book and more importantly on how we can all work together to help those living in extreme poverty. On that front, our concerns with the book will be no surprise to Dambisa. We have met with her several times. Our executive director Jamie Drummond even met with her before her book was published and gave her statistics about the positive difference aid was making – in fighting AIDS and malaria and putting kids in school, for example – but she did not include them. He spoke to her again in the past week. We are in a dialogue with her and we agree with her on the importance of trade and investment in fighting poverty in Africa, two things we have actively supported ourselves. We also agree with her that not all aid is spent well and that many many africans have concerns about aid, because in certain cases if delivered inappropriately it can weaken the accountability of government to citizens. That kind of aid needs phasing out and reform. We’re for the kind of smartaid that delivers results and actually strengthens the accountability linkage. But we part ways when she says that aid is not getting to people and that Africans won’t suffer if it’s all cut off in 5 years. What about the 2 million Africans with HIV who are alive today because they take ARVS paid for by aid? What would happen to them if aid were completely cut off? Or what about the millions more who are still dying of HIV because there is actually too little aid to pay for medicine for everyone who needs it?

I also want to address the comments some have made on “humanitarian aid.” In her interviews and in the book, Moyo says she believes in an exception for humanitarian aid, which she explains to mean the kind of aid provided after a disaster like an earthquake or the tsunami. If Moyo has been misunderstood and also believes in the importance of funding critical poverty reducing programs for combating AIDS and malaria that would be great news and we would be happy to amend our statements on the book. But when you look at her interviews and the book itself there is no evidence that she intends exceptions for these vital programs. In fact, see her comments on health related aid in an interview with Australian Broadcasting Corporation (excerpt below.)

Let’s keep the conversation going! We all have a common goal in wanting to save lives and see a healthy and prosperous Africa. We welcome a constructive debate and suggestions for how to keep doing better.

-Edith Jibunoh

ABC Transcript 3/17/09 (excerpted)
Reporter: Philip Williams

WILLIAMS: And you’re absolutely confident that removing that aid is not going to leave at least some people without food and medicine?

MOYO: I think the ones that will be effected most will probably be the African elite as opposed to the broader population.

WILLIAMS: What will they lose?

MOYO: I think they will lose possibly their bank accounts in Geneva in the worst-case scenario. But, I think beyond that they would also lose the ability to have leisure time and they’ll be required to actually go out and start to work hard to find money to support their social programs in Africa.

WILLIAMS: If you cut off aid within 5 years, surely that’s going to leave millions of people without the support they are now dependent on – food aid, medical aid – aid that really keeps people alive.

MOYO: I don’t believe that’s the case. Most Africans do not see any of the aid that you are alluding to. It’s…. again, their best case scenario on some projects is 20 cents in the dollar that actually makes it to an African – and that’s best case. Effectively, if we continue down this path, we will have many more Africans living in poverty in many… in a few years to come, and that is really the problem – that there are no jobs coming out of an aid model.

Every day I come across beneficiaries of aid who remind me of the importance of the work my organization does to ensure life saving programs are maintained in Africa. So as we debate the efficacy of aid, and remain resolved to ensuring its delivery is long term and sustainable, please check out the powerful story of Bose Oladayo from Lagos, Nigeria. Bose was ready to take her own life after learning she had AIDS, but after getting on treatment she is healthy again, supporting her family and working to help other HIV positive people in her community.

-Edith Jibunoh

Bose Oladayo, HOPE Worldwide, Lagos, Nigeria:

I got to know my HIV status in year 2000 out of inquisitiveness. I was afraid and thought I was as good as a ‘walking corpse’ because all information given around me were tales of woes to whoever is infected. Along with this great trouble is the fact that I am a single mother and the future of my child all lies with my support.

Troubled and with no one to talk to, I decided to take my “life” by being my own doctor. I prepared a concoction of so many substance among which are bleach, and took it. But for my late mum and intervention of the antiretroviral drugs, I would have been late and only God knows what will have become of my child.

I was able to access free drugs and also got psychosocial support from an NGO receiving funds from the American People – HOPE worldwide Nigeria.

Imagine same in the life of millions living with the virus and the replicating effect in families, particularly as it affects children ‘Our Future’.

There are lots of HIV infected people both in private & public sectors who are doing well and are contributing to the economic and social growth of their country. But for Antiretroviral drugs they would have been dead and their contributions lost.

Today I am a senior Program officer in HOPE worldwide Nigeria. I received trainings and my skills developed to counsel & test people, provide information about the deadly disease HIV&AIDS. I am involved and very active in breaking the silence – encouraging others like me to ‘live’ and live life to the fullest. I am also working with positive mothers to know that they can have healthy and HIV free children.

Being the Coordinator, South West, Treatment Action Movement of Nigeria (TAM), I am in the forefront of advocacy for drugs availability/accessibility, and also adherence campaign.

I am a major source of support economically to my family particularly my younger brother in the tertiary institution and my old ‘retired and tired’ father.

“I am a woman, a mother, a wife and a sister. I run a home; I work, feed my family, and bring up my children. I keep every one around me smiling. I am a person living with HIV, thanks to antiretroviral drugs, care and support. I speak not for myself but for many other people that I know.

HOPE Aid has touched lives of vulnerable & orphaned children by bringing hope for a better and brighter future. Education, Psychological Medical and Nutrition support to these children is contributing to the reduction of number of street children, child prostitution, school drop outs and delinquencies in our communities. Many now contribute to the wellbeing of their communities.

Private sector in Nigeria, has contributed immensely to the support for HIV/AIDS. This was made possible by the relentless efforts by international donors including USAID and many other international private organizations. Today, MTN Foundation in Nigeria spends an average of $2 million annually in the provision of HIV & AIDS treatment & care, support to OVC and prevention of mother to child transmission. Other private organizations like Petrobras, Coca-Cola Africa Foundation etc have also contributed.

There’s a new aid critic making a stir in the media this week. Dambisa Moyo, author of Dead Aid, is getting a lot of attention, but her critique of aid is contradicted by the facts and crude to the point of caricature. It’s too bad, because there are points in the book about trade and investment that we think are important. If you want to know more, check out this analysis we did of Dead Aid’s arguments – and why they’re wrong.

-Erin Thornton