Search

This article considers the implications of the strong poverty focus in the new White Paper for advancing gender equality. Recognizing that there are efficiency arguments in its focus on poor women and some dangers in too rigid a link being made between gender and poverty, it is argued that an equity and empowerment focus nevertheless inform the gender and poverty nexus. This does not necessarily imply that women's subordination is adequately dealt with. Making gender a cross-cutting issue in human rights goes some way towards escaping an anti-poverty approach to women. However, this does not automatically address gender relations and there are some contradictions even within the human rights focus itself. Beyond the principles of the White Paper, the real potential for promoting women's empowerment and advancing gender equity lies in its practice. The commitment to building partnerships needs to be extended to gender equitable partnerships which imply developing skills and new forms of practice among all partners to accommodate the participation of poor women, and recognising that accountability is a two-way street. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Labour government's new White Paper promises great changes in the British aid programme: re-focusing aid on poverty reduction, partnerships replacing one-sided conditionalities, and policy coherence so that the broad gamut of British policies in areas as diverse as agriculture, trade and investment are in line with the needs of international development. However, the Paper is stronger on broad policy statements than detail as to how to implement these strategies. Moreover, an examination of the history of British aid shows continuity to have been greater than change. Both Labour and Conservative governments have presided over cuts in UK aid, and so instead pointed to the high quality of British aid. But efforts to improve aid quality have been impeded by the use of aid to achieve political and commercial objectives. Whether the White Paper represents a break with the past cannot be determined by the Paper's brave rhetoric, but only by the future actions of the Department for International Development. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article lists several books including "Urban Economic Development," edited by Richard D. Bingham and John P. Blair, "Regulation by Municipal Licensing," J. Bossoms, S. M. Makuch and J. Palmer, and "Public Policy and Administrative Studies," volume 1, edited by O. P. Dwivedi.

This article offers a discursive analysis of the Conservative green paper for international development, published as part of the closely fought election campaign of 2010 that culminated in a UK coalition government with the Liberal Democrats. The article examines the paper in comparison with the discursive shifts represented by the first Department for International Development (DfID) white paper, published by the outgoing Labour administration in 1997. In contrast with the optimistic and globalist developmentalism that characterised Labour's development discourse, the green paper sounds a more cautious note, using empire to focus on Britain's leadership role in poverty alleviation rather than on global progress, and brings back the full force of developmentalism only at the point where it seeks to legitimate spending on security concerns as a development concern. The article then moves on to examine the green paper's most explicit discursive move, the signalling of a 'post-bureaucratic age'. This move towards increased information provision to promote transparency and accountability is likely to signal greater control by powerful donors in securitised times, albeit with a potential re-scaling of responsibility for poverty alleviation to the poorest local communities. Finally, the article looks briefly at information technologies in relation to the transnational spatiality of civil society, arguing that attention needs to be paid to the more embodied forms of transnational association encouraged by the green paper, and to the selection and impacts of information, which need to be seen in the discursive context of wider Conservative constructions of the 'big society'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this article is to propose a review of 85 empirical papers examining the relationships between insurance and economic development, that is, the insurance-growth nexus. When looking at the economic importance of the insurance sector, most papers in the past have looked at the demand side (the level of economic development is an explanatory variable among other factors that affect the demand for insurance). Because the role of the insurance sector and its contribution to development is at the agenda of international organizations and because the importance of the relationship between financial development and economic growth has been well recognized and emphasized in the field of economic development, more recent papers have examined the causality links between insurance and economic development and the role of insurance as a significant determinant in the process of economic growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a discursive analysis of Great Britain's Conservative Party 2011 Green Paper "One World Conservatism: A Conservative agenda for international development." It offers a comparison of the conception of development in that paper with the 1997 Labour Party White Paper which launched the development of the Department for International Development (DFID). The discourse used to describe Britain's role in promoting global development and reducing poverty is examined.

Books reviewed in this article: Eliminating World Poverty: Making Governance Work for the Poor – A White Paper on International Development. By the Secretary of State for International Development [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents the perspective of the Independent Group on British Aid (IGBA) 1997 White Paper on International Development. Measures for which the IGBA has been campaigning since the publication of "Real Aid: A Strategy for Britain," in 1982; Significance of the White Paper; Advice from the group regarding the White Paper on International Development.

The White Paper signals a clear, strong and comprehensive commitment by the British government to use its aid and influence to help poor people. It spells out a range of specific aims to benefit and empower the poor and especially women. It endorses a new powerful concept of partnership with its own commitments to partners and it specifies the implications of any lack of commitment by them to poverty reduction. Unfortunately there is no systematic exposition of the changes in policies required to achieve pro-poor growth; there are ambiguities about targeting and no lessons are drawn about what has worked well in its own past interventions. DFID appears to want to ‘go it alone’ with little indication of the collective efforts (including other donors) required to achieve these ambitious goals. Nevertheless, the agency has organizational strengths to achieve its new strategy which gives confidence that more precise operational strategies will be devised and pursued with conviction in the coming years. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the White Paper from the rural perspective. It notes that very little attention is paid in the text to natural resources spending. However the text does provide some indication of the direction in which rural development policy within DFID might evolve. In particular it can be expected that the scope of rural interventions will expand to embrace a more holistic concept of rural livelihoods. This has several implications which DFID must address in the near future if this important opportunity for reorientation is not to be lost. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]