Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Supervisor: F. Arab
N. Kwanjai K. Diakidis
T. Krume
C. Tonne
Pigeonhole 501
Date: May 28, 2009
2E Making a European Market
Version: Final Draft
Words: 4953
Outline
Abbreviations……………………………………………………………………...x
1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………1
7. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………13
8. References……………………………………………………………………15
The EU‟s development policy can be traced back to the Schuman Declaration of
1950, in which the topic of development assistance to Africa was emphasized as an
Worldwide, countries are confronted with enormous debt burdens towards various
multilateral and bilateral institutions that they cannot manage. It additionally hinders
their economic growth as well as their fight against poverty. Launched in 1996 and
enhanced in 1999, the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF)
established the Heavily-Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative, which is “a
comprehensive approach to debt reduction” (IMF, 2009). It stems from the Lyon G8
summit in France in 1996, where the G8 decided to strengthen joint efforts in the field
of development policy (G8 Information Centre, 1996). By the end of 2007, $51 billion
as debt reduction packages in total were given to eligible countries (IMF, 2009). Thus
the aim of the HIPC initiative is to lower the external debt burden of the “poorest and
most indebted countries” to “sustainable levels” (EC, 2009c). The initiative includes
multilateral and bilateral public creditors as well as commercial creditors (ibid.).
The EU has financially supported the program since its beginning in 1996, and
acts as “creditor as well as donor” (ibid.). As a donor, the EU assists through the
HIPC Trust Fund, run by the World Bank with special focus on the ACP countries
(EC, 2002). In total, €1.6 billion have been given so far, with €934million to the Trust
Fund and €680 million given beyond HIPC. EU debt relief to the Trust Fund is
financed by the EDF (EC, 2009c).
In order to investigate the impact of debt relief for both the giver and the donor, in this
case the ACP countries and the European Union, it is crucial to define economic
development. Economic growth and development are often confused, because some
people use them as synonymous. But they have distinct differences. Whereas growth
is quantitative and "refers to the increase in an economy's real gross domestic product
(GDP) and income over time" (Ezeala-Harrison, 1996, p. 3), economic development
is much more qualitative in nature. It “involves the process through which a country
or region achieves economic growth in addition to structural transformation of its
economy” (Ezeala-Harrison, 1996, p. 10). Accordingly, development policies are
aimed not only to improve economic growth, but also to covers humanitarian aspects,
such as to prevent crises.
EU development policy is very controversial, because of the lack of
effectiveness. Although the CA for instance, set out debt relief for HIPC countries, it
is insufficient from an economics perspective. The ACP countries are highly
dependent on capital accumulation, because sustainable economic growth in these
1
Source: reproduced from The World Bank (2009). Poverty. Retrieved May 5, 2009, from:
http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/beyond/beyondbw/begbw_06.pdf
Table 3 demonstrates clearly that the reasons for distributing foreign aid are rather
colonial ties instead of the necessity of stability through democratic values. But
because stability is an important factor for foreign investments and capital
accumulation, new firms will not enter the market or make investments in that
country. As a result, development policies are not efficient, because of bad judgments,
bad infrastructure and misallocation of savings (see Alesina & Dollar, Gunning). They
still have positive effects on growth and sustainable development in stable countries
with good governance (see Epstein & Gent, 2009).
To conclude, the receiver benefits from foreign aid in terms of foreign
investment and savings, as well as, decreasing poverty. Receiving countries cannot
have sustainable growth without foreign aid. Therefore, it is needed to increase the
2
Source: reproduced from Alesina & Dollar (2000) p. 42.
After having covered both theoretical concepts of development policy and debt relief,
it is now appropriate to turn to a real world example in order to realistically illustrate
the outlined concepts. In order to do so successfully this section provides a case study
on Ghana. This case study mainly pursues the goal of establishing whether the EU‟s
debt relief policy has really helped Ghana enhance economic growth and development
or not. Evidence for this case shall be brought forward in terms of concrete facts and
figures as well as a broad socioeconomic analysis, serving to provide a general
overview.
Economic analysis quickly reveals what a high economic potential Ghana
possesses. Despite this fact, Ghana‟s unfavourable economic structure has remained
the same for decades. Up until 1983 barely any successful efforts were made to move
away from the sole exportation of primary products such as cocoa, bauxite, timber as
well as gold (European Commission, 2006). As it is generally known, high
dependency on primary, mostly unprocessed, products may be very harmful to the
economy as the terms of trade are constantly worsening for unprocessed raw/primary
products. However, since 1983 Ghana has been devoted to change this situation by
means of committing to strict economic reform projects. With the support of
international donors Ghana has been able to curb economic growth between 1991 and
2002 by 4.2 percent per annum (European Commission, 2006).
As part of Ghana‟s initiative to revive economic growth in 2002 it applied for
the HIPC programme. The main thought behind doing so was to free itself from the
enormous fiscal burden which accumulated together with external foreign debt.
Having illustrated the EU‟s development policy and especially debt relief measures
in ACP countries a critical assessment of their effectiveness remains to be given. On
the basis of the illustrated economic theory behind debt relief measures, several
shortcomings become visible. As has been illustrated in a previous section debt relief
measures are highly controversial regarding the dependency between receiver and
donor states as regards to economic growth.
As previously stated, the European Union‟s foreign policy tries to drag
underdeveloped countries out of the vicious circle of poverty. Hence, it attempts to
increase the amount of capital within these countries in order increase income,
savings, investments and finally consumption. So why do the Unions development
measures and debt relief in particular often remain unsuccessful?
One major reason is the EU‟s exclusive focus on economic growth. As
previously illustrated foreign aid often creates colonial-like ties between the donor-
and receiver states and therewith makes the latter highly dependent on foreign
investments and resultant capital accumulation. As a result, a dependency in the form
of colonial ties between the donor and receiver states is created. Allesina and Dollar
argue that these colonial-like ties lead to an insufficient promotion of democratic
values and their institutionalization in the receiving countries (Allesina&Dollar,
2005). Often these countries governments mal-invest the given capital into measures
that do not enhance economic growth. Hence, the vicious circle of poverty cannot be
7. Conclusion
The paper set out to answer the following question: To what extent does the EU‟s
debt relief policy enhance economic growth and development in developing
countries? To answer this question the paper looked at both theoretical concepts of
development policy and debt relief as well as at a concrete case study of Ghana.
As has been shown, the EU development policy intends to help developing
countries to break out of the vicious circle of poverty, through multiple measures
including debt relief. Yet, what has become visible is that EU development policy is
often ineffective as it does not seem to have a significant positive effect on the
recipient‟s macroeconomic policy and growth. For one, this seems to be due to an
incorrect allocation of resources, such as through insufficient bureaucratic institutions
in the receiving countries. For two, it has been argued that EU often directs its
development aid rather to countries with colonial ties and thereby often disregards
political stability, such as democracy and human rights compliance.
In the case of Ghana it was shown that while Ghana has indeed enjoyed an
upheaval of economic growth in the framework of the HIPC initiative, EU
development policy action towards Ghana remains largely controversial. While
supporting the HIPC in Ghana, trade barriers for Ghanaian imports into the EU
remain thereby dramatically weaken Ghana‟s export ability. In addition, EU dumping