[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]

commercial channels for distribution of contraceptives, and the development of
low-cost systems for delivering effective health and family planning services to the
85% of LDC populations not now reached by such services.
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
-- Expanded efforts to increase the awareness of LDC leaders and publics regarding the
consequences of rapid population growth and to stimulate further LDC commitment
to actions to reduce fertility.
We believe expansions in the range of 35-50 million annually over the next five years are
realistic, in light of potential LDC needs and prospects for increased contributions from other
population assistance instrumentalities, as well as constraints on the speed with which AID (and
other donors) population funds can be expanded and effectively utilized. These include negative
or ambivalent host government attitudes toward population reduction programs; the need for
complementary financial and manpower inputs by recipient governments, which must come at
the expense of other programs they consider to be high priority; and the need to assure that new
projects involve sensible, effective actions that are likely to reduce fertility. We must avoid
inadequately planned or implemented programs that lead to extremely high costs per acceptor. In
effect, we are closer to "absorptive capacity" in terms of year- to-year increases in population
programs than we are, for example, in annual expansions in food, fertilizer or generalized
resource transfers.
It would be premature to make detailed funding recommendations by countries
and functional categories in light of our inability to predict what changes -- such as in host
country attitudes to U.S. population assistance and in fertility control technologies -- may occur
which would significantly alter funding needs in particular geographic or functional areas. For
example, AID is currently precluded from providing bilateral assistance to India and Egypt, two
significant countries in the highest priority group, due to the nature of U.S. political and
diplomatic relations with these countries. However, if these relationships were to change and
bilateral aid could be provided, we would want to consider providing appropriate population
assistance to these countries. In other cases, changing U.S. - LDC relationships might preclude
further aid to some countries. Factors such as these could both change the mix and affect overall
magnitudes of funds needed for population assistance. Therefore, proposed program mixes and
funding levels by geographic and functional categories should continue to be examined on an
annual basis during the regular USG program and budget review processes which lead to the
presentation of funding requests to the Congress.
Recognizing that changing opportunities for action could substantially affect AID's
resource requirements for population assistance, we anticipate that, if funds are provided by the
Congress at the levels projected, we would be able to cover necessary actions related to the
highest priority countries and also those related to lower priority countries, moving reasonably far
down the list. At this point, however, AID believes it would not be desirable to make priority
judgments on which activities would not be funded if Congress did not provide the levels
projected. If cuts were made in these levels we would have to make judgments based on such
factors as the priority rankings of countries, then-existing LDC needs, and divisions of labour
with other actors in the population assistance area.
If AID's population assistance program is to expand at the general magnitudes cited
above, additional direct hire staff will likely be needed. While the expansion in program action
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
would be primarily through grants and contracts with LDC or U.S. institutions, or through
contributions to international organizations, increases in direct hire staff would be necessary to
review project proposals, monitor their implementation through such instrumentalities, and
evaluate their progress against pre-established goals. Specific direct hire manpower requirements
should continue to be considered during the annual program and budget reviews, along with
details of program mix and funding levels by country and functional category, in order to
correlate staffing needs with projected program actions for a particular year.
Recommendations
1. The U.S. strategy should be to encourage and support, through bilateral,
multilateral and other channels, constructive action to lower fertility rates in selected developing
countries. The U.S. should apply each of the relevant provisions of its World Population Plan of
Action and use it to influence and support actions by developing countries.
2. Within this overall strategy, the U.S. should give highest priority, in terms of
resource allocation (along with donors) to efforts to encourage assistance from others to those
countries cited above where the population problem is most serious, and provide assistance to
other countries as funds and staff permit.
3. AID's further development of population program priorities, both geographic and
functional, should be consistent with the general strategy discussed above, with the other
recommendations of this paper and with the World Population Plan of Action. The strategies
should be coordinated with the population activities of other donors countries and agencies using
the WPPA as leverage to obtain suitable action.
4. AID's budget requests over the next five years should include a major expansion of
bilateral population and family planning programs (as appropriate for each country or region), of
functional activities as necessary, and of contributions through multilateral channels, consistent
with the general funding magnitudes discussed above. The proposed budgets should emphasize
the country and functional priorities outlined in the recommendations of this study and as [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]