Jean-Michel Severino, Director General of the French Agency for Development comments on the results of the aid perception barometer.

Les Afriques: What are the main findings of the 2008 AFD / IFOP barometer on “Development aid: the perceptions and expectations of the French people”?

Jean-Michel Severino: This survey shows that the French are still quite attached to the role France plays in the realm of development. Sixty-nine percent of the French people approve of the budget devoted to this effort. There is also a clear consensus on what should be the outcome of aid – the reduction of global poverty. But there are conflicting points of view as far as how to go about achieving this end. Indeed, in order for development aid to be sustainable, one must promote economic growth. However, the French clearly prefer “social” aid. Therefore, there is a real debate about how to reduce poverty in a sustainable way. The French are also in favour of aid without any personal gain. The motive of helping for the good of all is a recurrent theme: one must help poor countries wherever they may be. Lastly, this survey shows that the French are willing to get involved and are keen on being informed.

LA: How do you explain these results despite frequent comments about how “tiring” aid can be?

JMS: Perhaps the series of studies conducted over the last three years, which shows widespread support among the French for this kind of public policy, sheds new light on this very theory. That being said, explaining reasons for development aid to the people, what tools are required, what it can and cannot do, is always an ongoing effort.

African decision-makers also have a role to play in the effort to find solutions. LA: Africa has been absent throughout the management of the recent financial crisis for which it is not responsible but must still struggle to surmount. Does that seem fair to you?

JMS: People have been referring to this financial crisis as a “crisis for the wealthy” or a “bulemic crisis” resulting from capitalism pushed to the extreme in some industrialised countries. In actual fact, these developments are likely to affect Africa. The injustice of this situation should not prevent us from acting as quickly as possible so as to limit the effects of these repercussions. This is what our teams have been working on since the start of the financial crisis. African decision-makers also have a role to play in the effort to find solutions. The reform of governance of the World Bank, which granted Africa an additional seat on its Council, is a step in the right direction. France fought long and hard for this change.

LA: What effect is the financial crisis likely to have on Africa? And what can be done to prevent them from occurring?

JMS: The direct impact will be limited in Sub-Saharan Africa where the financial markets are only minimally integrated in the global system. What we are most concerned about are the round 2 effects, meaning the impact that the slowdown in the real economy of industrialised countries will have on Africa. We are keeping a close eye on three factors. Firstly, if a significant slowdown occurs in the global economy, the price of Africa’s main exports could fall which, in turn, would lead to a decline in revenue for companies and local governments of the sub-Continent. Secondly, direct investments in Africa, which had reached record levels in 2007 (over 30% in comparison to 2006!), could also decrease in 2008 and 2009. Lastly, an economic slow in industrialised countries could also significantly reduce the money transfers from African workers living abroad. The combination of these risks led the IMF to predict that African growth would dip in 2009. According to these forecasts, growth figures should fall somewhere above 5 points. One must also note the positive factors – winter in the Sahel region promises a fine harvest; food and energy prices are falling, providing a much-needed breath of fresh air. It is therefore difficult to have an overly compartmentalised reading of economic perspectives for 2009.

LA: Your barometer highlights the inefficiency of this aid. Who is to blame? Can aid be effective?

JMS: The opinion expressed isn’t negative. It is simply uncertain as to the efficacy of aid. People simply don’t see what’s being done. We have more work to do in that regard. Information on the results of our activities is a fundamental part of our mandate. The scepticism that persists is due in part to the gap between goals and means in the aid process. If it is able to assist economic development or compensate its absence with social measures, it isn’t fair to expect it to be the sole means of achieving growth. The volumes invested are simply not enough to do this on their own. One cannot expect the APD to “get Africa off the ground” nor can it be expected to do so in any other region of the world. Yet, empirical studies conducted over the last few years attest to the positive impact aid has in reducing poverty and facilitating growth. For example, in thirty years, adult illiteracy has decreased by 40% in Sub-Saharan Africa. There has been a similar decline in infant mortality despite the region’s low per capita growth rate. The involvement of the French Agency for Development has helped to secure the provision of drinking water to 3.1 million people and has also shouldered the treatment of 2.2 million people carrying infectious diseases. Therefore, yes, without a doubt, aid can be efficient.

LA: When will we have a barometer on the expectations of beneficiaries of public development aid?

JMS: The 2008 edition of the survey included a section on Senegal. The aim was to evaluate the awareness, expectations and perceptions of beneficiary populations of an educational project led by the AFD in the suburbs of Dakar. Ninety-five percent of the families with a child in the schools participating in the project felt that it was “important” or “very important”. They wanted the project to continue.

Interview by Chérif Elvalide Sèye