How Africa can extract big benefits for everyone from natural resources – cash transfers, so the Guardian post says. I am a bit skeptical that this would provide any quick fixes either for poverty alleviation or reducing corruption, and sparsely populated Alaska may not be a great example to follow. But certainly any idea to distribute benefits more equitably is good for the debate on how to use natural resources around the world.
Via DFID blogger Hannah Ryder, found that the evidence from its Cash Transfers Evidence Paper still needs a bit more research. But some interesting trends. The executive summary includes the following current priorities for data and analysis on cash transfers that:
- identifies the challenges and opportunities associated with different contexts and intended beneficiary groups;
- supports cost-benefit analysis that enables policy-makers to make more informed comparisons between cash transfer design options (and with investments in other sectors);
- deepens understanding of the political economy of cash transfers;
- tracks whether and under what circumstances transfer delivery supports access to and use of financial services;
- goes beyond specific transfer programmes to support the design and evolution of integrated social protection systems, linking cash transfers with policies for service delivery, accountability and labour-intensive growth;
- integrates cash transfers and other instruments (e.g. insurance) within multi- sectoral strategies to enhance resilience to climate variability.
(This is a good tag to look back at previous thoughts on “natural resources” and “development” in the Guardian blog.)