Can donors prove that aid works?

The UK's Department for International Development (DFID) is putting a renewed focus on monitoring and evaluating the outcomes of its funding. In June it published an evaluation policy to guide this work which, among other things, anticipates a stronger role for developing countries themselves.

"We have to be much better at demonstrating how the money is spent. This requires us to be more focused on value for money, better at managing risk and, of course, demonstrating where and how our investments are making a difference," says Abigail Mulhall from DFID's research uptake team. "If investments are not making a difference, or are failing, we also have to be more accountable," she adds.

DFID is also considering how to get developing countries to adopt more of the recommendations its research suggests. On September 14 it held a seminar for media professionals, policymakers and researchers in Stellenbosch, South Africa, to discuss the idea of funding a global Research Communications Support Facility.

The facility, which DFID is likely to test-run in Africa, would help researchers get their message across to the government or media, and vice versa. In particular it would help DFID grant-holders, who are expected to spend at least 10 per cent of their budgets on outreach activities, to plan and carry out this side of their work well.

Make no excuses

But, as one researcher at the Stellenbosch seminar warned, making research accessible does not automatically mean it will be used. For that, there needs to be a "thirst for knowledge". Creating this demand might prove the biggest challenge for aid organisations wanting to demonstrate the value of their work.

The vilification of the aid “business” in Sweden has forced donors on the defensive. SIDA's director general said last month that although it is important to look for outcomes, the fact that aid aims to help and protect people in some of the world's most corrupt and dangerous countries means you cannot guarantee 100 per cent success.

Such comments, while well intended, risk turning the public off aid completely, by making it sound like some degree of misspending might be acceptable.

With donors' reputations hanging in the balance, there is no doubt that closer scrutiny of aid's value for money should be encouraged and donors should use these lean times to prove their worth to taxpayers.

Doing so could help boost their popularity. But it would also give supporters of science for development the opportunity to add hard facts to the rhetoric that made organisations like SIDA invest in African science to begin with. If investing in science and technology works to boost development, there should be plenty of evidence to support it by now.