“Australia has an ethical and moral responsibility to provide aid to countries which are less well off” Each year, Australia spends billions of dollars on providing aid to poorer countries to improve health systems, poverty, education as well as providing immediate assistance when natural disasters hit. The Australian Government’s overseas aid program is improving the lives of millions of people in developing countries. The statement saying “Australia has an ethical and moral responsibility to provide aid to countries which are less well off” is debateable.
The provision of aid by Australia inevitably has cultural, economic and geopolitical impacts. Whether these impacts are positive or negative for Australia to some extent depends on perspective. There are several advantages as well as disadvantages associated with Australia providing aid which can be seen as both positive and negative impacts on Australia. Advantages include that it improves regional relations and it creates future markets for our goods and services.
However on the other side, disadvantages include harm to Australia’s international relations, it encourages culture of dependence and as well as other negative impacts of the developing countries. Australia has an ethical and moral responsibility to provide aid to countries which are less well-off as it can improve regional relations with countries and it creates a caring and compassionate image of Australia. A wealthy country that focuses on serving the needs of its own population without assisting its less fortunate neighbours would, of course, be perceived negatively.
Through its aid programs, the Australian Government is working to achieve greater equality and social justice for the Asia Pacific region. Australia provides aid to improve many aspects such as clean water, food, housing, health care, education and economic opportunities. By doing this, it creates a positive image of Australia as we are seen as caring and compassionate towards those less fortunate. In addition, it also improves regional relations with other countries and creates friendly allies.
Through its aid programs, Australia improve regional relations by entering into dialogue with neighbouring countries, redistributing wealth and creating some shared common values. Evidently, the statement “Australia has an ethical and moral responsibility to provide aid to countries which are less well-off” is depicted to be true because it strengthens the relationship between countries and therefore it is Australia’s national interest to be an aid donor.
Moreover, Australia has an ethical and moral responsibility to provide aid to countries which are less well-off is beneficial to Australia as it creates future markets for our goods and services. Through economic development in the developing countries, a significant proportion of Australia’s aid is tied aid which means the recipient nation must spend some of the aid on Australia’s goods and services. This strategy is beneficial for both countries because while recipient countries benefit from Australia’s aid, Australian businesses and organisations also benefit as they are contracted to provide goods and services.
Thus, this provides job opportunities for Australians, increase export sales and helps Australian companies access new and future markets. Thus, by contributing to the reduction of poverty and the growth of industries and employment in the neighbouring countries, it is advantageous to Australia because it opens new markets for Australia’s goods and services. In contrast, there are also negative impacts of contributing aid to developing countries because it may harm Australia’s international relations instead of improving the relations.
Australia’s efforts to provide aid are not always welcomes by all of the population in developing countries. Australia’s approach with providing aid has been perceived as paternalistic and the intrusion resented. In addition, many aid agencies make decisions about how the aid will be used without taking into account the social, cultural and environmental needs of individual communities. For example, the Bougainville Copper Mine and the OK Tedi Mine in Papua New Guinea have had significant environment impacts and have adversely affected the health and well-being of local communities.
Therefore, it is evident that giving aid to developing countries, rather than improving regional relations, it can harm international relations when the aid is not welcomed. Furthermore, opportunity cost is also a major disadvantage affiliated with the provision of aid to the developing counties. Opportunity cost simply means the loss of potential gain from other alternatives when one alternative is chosen. The fact that the nation giving aid receives nothing for its investments can harm the nation’s current account balance as it is recorded as a debit.
This is also a type of intervention in the market because Australia is using resources in an inefficient manner where the government should be spending the money to improve our own nation rather than spending money on other countries. For example, in 2006–07 the Australian government allocated $2. 946 billion of its annual budget to ODA. In allocating this money to aid, there is an opportunity cost as these funds can no longer be spent in Australia. Aspects such as improving production and invest in infrastructure and education/health to improve the nation is definitely important in improving our nation as a whole.
Therefore the fact that providing aid has many opportunity costs, contradicts to the statement “Australia has an ethical and moral responsibility to provide aid to countries which are less well-off” because it may not be beneficial for Australia to provide aid in this perspective. Additionally, giving aid to developing counties can result in a culture of dependence and opposes the statement that “Australia has an ethical and moral responsibility to provide aid to countries which are less well-off”.
Aid funds can encourage a ‘culture of dependence’ which means instead of the country using the aid to become more independent of donor nations by implementing programs and policies, they remain dependent on aid. The dependence of Papua New Guinea on Australia is of particular concern as Australian aid makes up 80 per cent of the annual budget. Australia is the PNG Government’s major source of income and approximately 90 per cent PNG’s bilateral links are with Australia.
As a result, Australia’s financial support for Papua New Guinea has put Australia in a politically dominant position where Papua New Guinea has increased its reliance on the aid that Australia is currently providing. It is clearly exemplified the fact that aid encourages a culture of dependence of developing nations on developed nations opposes the statement that “Australia has an ethical and moral responsibility to provide aid to countries which are less well-off”. In conclusion, the provision of aid by Australia inevitably has cultural, economic and geopolitical impacts.
Whether these impacts are positive or negative for Australia to some extent depends on perspective. The statement “Australia has an ethical and moral responsibility to provide aid to countries which are less well off” is controversial as it has supportive information on both perspectives. Whether aid brings advantages or disadvantages to Australia largely depends on how the aid is delivered and how it is received. In some instances providing aid to neighbouring countries may help to strengthen ties while, in other instances, it may be resented by certain groups within a population.