Talk:Aid effectiveness

Can following numbers be mentioned:

All of these problems have made that a very large part of the spend money on development aid is simply wasted uselessly. According to Gerbert van der Aa, for the Netherlands, only 33% of the development aid is succeful, another 33% fails and of the remaining 33% the effect is unclear. This means that for example for the Netherlands, 1.33 to 2.66 billion is lost as it spends 4 billion in total of development aid (or 0,8% of the gros national product).^[1]

Many European countries have similar percentages of gnp given to aid development. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.163.19 (talk) 11:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Is Aid meant to work like a stimulus package to receipient countries?. If so, the recent actions by developed countries in dealing with the Global crisis can tell a thing or two about what really works to bring about growth from any financial injection, be it through Aid agencies donations or other sources. HNyathi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.133.69.201 (talk) 08:56, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

No, aid is meant to work as a stimulus for development. So, let's not confuse these two things. Through aid (and I mean development aid; not humanitarian assistance, which is another thing) you aim at creating structures that will sustain grown and development.--Yannismarou (talk) 16:40, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Needs one, evident at the beginning of reading the first section. 81.158.208.97 (talk) 16:05, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Aid effectiveness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081120200740/http://www.accrahlf.net/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/ACCRAEXT/0,,contentMDK:21690889~isCURL:Y~menuPK:64861438~pagePK:64861884~piPK:64860737~theSitePK:4700791,00.html to http://www.accrahlf.net/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/ACCRAEXT/0,,contentMDK:21690889~isCURL:Y~menuPK:64861438~pagePK:64861884~piPK:64860737~theSitePK:4700791,00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080517043810/http://www.oecd.org/dac/conflict to http://www.oecd.org/dac/conflict

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:29, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

^[1] Moyo's position has been stated well - neutral point of view. However, elaboration on the each statement is not in-depth. Syedadi7 (talk) 06:08, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aid effectiveness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080915230956/http://www.gatesfoundation.org/default.htm to http://www.gatesfoundation.org/default.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:40, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Aid effectiveness. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091009071531/http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2009/0317_aid_governance_kaufmann.aspx to http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2009/0317_aid_governance_kaufmann.aspx
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.inwent.org/ez/articles/084417/index.en.shtml
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.irenkenya.com/modules/articles/index.php?article_title_id=18
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.g8.gov.uk/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.accrahlf.net/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/ACCRAEXT/0%2C%2CcontentMDK%3A21690889~isCURL%3AY~menuPK%3A64861438~pagePK%3A64861884~piPK%3A64860737~theSitePK%3A4700791%2C00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081015030839/http://www.accrahlf.net/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/ACCRAEXT/0%2C%2CcontentMDK%3A21690826~menuPK%3A64861649~pagePK%3A64861884~piPK%3A64860737~theSitePK%3A4700791%2C00.html to http://www.accrahlf.net/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/ACCRAEXT/0%2C%2CcontentMDK%3A21690826~menuPK%3A64861649~pagePK%3A64861884~piPK%3A64860737~theSitePK%3A4700791%2C00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120226135347/http://www.internationalhealthpartnership.net/CMS_files/documents/ihp_global_compact_EN.pdf to http://www.internationalhealthpartnership.net/CMS_files/documents/ihp_global_compact_EN.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:55, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians! I will be working on this article as an assignment for my technical editing class at Texas A&M University. I will mainly be focusing on the organization of the current sections to strengthen the order the information is presented as well as the structure of the individual sections. I'm open to any advice on all matters regarding this article so please reach out to me with any other information you see will be good for me to know! Thank you.

Actionpotential (talk) 20:23, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello everyone,

I wanted to run something by everyone as I have come across potentially a major change to the layout of the article! I am open to any advice or feedback. I have realized that there are a few sections that provide very lengthy and bulky patches of information, those being "Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, February 2005", "Third High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Accra, September 2008", and "Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Busan, South Korea, November 2011". I wanted to know some thoughts on potentially making these sections separate articles of their own, the reason being that they each contain very thorough and bulky content that I believe can be better displayed as individual articles.

For this specific article, I believe a section such as "Forums on aid effectiveness" that highlights certain points from the three sections combined will look cleaner and also with links provided for the respective separate articles for someone looking to read more into it. Again, I think this will take out some big blocks that can hinder this articles organization but I am hoping to get feedback and hear what others have to say before I move forward! Thank you

Actionpotential (talk) 05:08, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

That sounds good to me, as long as you can get adequate references for each new article. Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 20:56, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Sounds great! I do believe someone a little more qualified with information pertaining to the topic would be a better fit for adding new content. I wasn't planning to add any content to the articles if I made separate ones but I'm happy to have gotten that idea across for anyone else to follow up on! Actionpotential (talk) 02:33, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello wikipedians,

In as many parts I can find, I will be attempting to change the tone of language from a personal reflection or opinion essay to more of an encyclopedia style as flagged by Wikipedia WP:NOTESSAY

Thank you

Actionpotential (talk) 20:31, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

I will be splitting the sections "Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, February 2005", "Third High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Accra, September 2008", and "Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness, Busan, South Korea, November 2011" into a new article for High Level Forums on Aid Effectiveness. I am doing this to remove a huge block of content straying away from relevance to the article's main point, i.e. what aid effectiveness is, while also effecting the readability of the article (WP:WHENSPLIT).

Thank you

Actionpotential (talk) 21:54, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

To do this, I will first be compiling those three sections into one, in accordance with Wikipedia's guidelines on splitting an article (WP:CORRECTSPLIT)

Actionpotential (talk) 21:58, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

I think we need to adjust the scope of this article. "Aid effectiveness" is defined in the opening sentence with its commonsense meaning. But much of the article currently views the topic very much through the lens of the agenda or movement associated with the High Level Forums of 2003-2011, which had a special take on it. In my view, Actionpotential was right to devolve the High Level Forums into another article, but did not go far enough. I think that all of the material referring to that particular process and perspective should be in its own article, framed as a historical moment. In the broader "Aid effectiveness" article we can refer to and briefly summarize the material on that movement. True, many of the 2003-11 concerns are perennial in some form or other, and indeed most of them have carried over into the more current "development cooperation" movement and agenda. But in the "Aid effectiveness" article we should try to maintain a balanced broader perspective.

At the same time, we should see the "Aid effectiveness" article as a child of the "Development Aid" article and a grandchild of the "Aid" article. There is currently a lot of material in those articles that probably should be devolved to the "Aid effectiveness" article. Mrmedley (talk) 15:45, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

There appears to be no sources cited in the paragraph, and the link for Hernando De Soto redirects to an unrelated article. I have attempted to fix the link, but unable to give the required sources as I have not read the relevant materials.

Yours warmly, Loen_ltat 103.70.161.162 (talk) 14:30, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

As a follow up, I believe I was unable to fix the link. Pls help.

Warmly 103.70.161.162 (talk) 14:37, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Loen_ltat, for pointing this out. I have fixed the biographical link and added a reference for the mentioned book. However, in looking at this sub-section, I realize its relation to the topic of Aid Effectiveness is unclear. I feel it should really be removed unless we can make clearer the bearing of this work on aid for reforming LDC institutions. What do you think? Mrmedley (talk) 01:21, 3 December 2023 (UTC)