![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
On taking office in late 2013, the incoming Abbott government proclaimed the advent of a new aid paradigm. This article asks whether or not this is the case. It does so by situating the new coalition policy in the context of more than two decades of development thinking. Focusing on the way Australian aid policy reflects trends in both global development and geopolitical discourses, the article parses out continuity and change. It finds that Australia's new aid paradigm is in fact largely the old aid paradigm reincarnate, with aid policy continuing to follow the well-established parameters outlined over decades of global thinking and practice that emphasise the significance of private-sector-led economic growth. However, while the overarching paradigm remains relatively intact, incremental change is also apparent, including alterations to the geographic focus, level and administration of the program.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Funding
Both authors have been or continue to be associated with the State, Society and Governance in Melanesia Program, a research unit at the Australian National University that is part funded by the Australian government's aid program.
Notes on contributors
Jack Corbett is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Governance and Public Policy and the Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith Business School, Griffith University. His most recent book is “Being Political: Leadership and Democracy in the Pacific Islands” and he is currently writing a history of the Australian aid program.
Sinclair Dinnen is a Senior Fellow with the State, Society and Melanesia Program in the Coral bell School of Asia-Pacific Affairs at the Australian National University in Canberra. He formerly lectured in law at the University of Papua New Guinea and was a senior fellow at PNG's National Research Institute. He has undertaken extensive research and policy work in the Melanesian Pacific and published widely on issues of justice, security and development.
Notes
1. The authors would like to acknowledge the thoughtful comments and suggestions provided by Michael Wesley, James Batley and two anonymous reviewers on an earlier draft of this article. The views expressed in this article are those of the two authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the organisations that they work for. Otherwise, all of the usual academic caveats apply.
2. See ‘Australia's Aid Program’ at: http://www.dfat.gov.au/aid/Pages/australias-aid-program.aspx (accessed March 18, 2015).
3. For commentary on the nuts and bolts of this policy shift and how ‘new’ it is, see various posts on the Development Policy Centre Blog (http://devpolicy.org), including by Robin Davies, Stephen Howes, Joel Negin and Ben Day; the Lowy Interpreter (http://www.lowyinterpreter.org) by Annmaree O'Keeffe; and the Conversation (http://theconversation.com/au) by Andrew Rosser.
4. A third possible narrative revolves around the commercial benefits of the aid program for Australian industry. We do not cover this debate in great detail here for two reasons: (1) it has already been the subject of examination in this journal (Rosser Citation2008), and (2) because the practice of tying aid has decreased in recent decades, in line with global trends. It may well be revived in the future. We certainly do not dismiss the importance of budgetary constraints on recent reductions. It is also quite possible that the absence of a strong commercial lobby for aid contributed to AusAID's decline. However, these are all questions for a more substantive treatment of the history of Australia's aid program.
5. See the UN Peacekeeping website at: http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/operations/surge.shtml (accessed February 26, 2015).
6. The specifics of how this decision was reached and whose advice it was made on—officials or political staff—remains a mystery to even those in the highest echelons of the former AusAID.
7. http://tanyaplibersek.com/2015/02/2015-australasian-aid-conference/ (accessed March 15, 2015).
8. These comments were made in the Questions and Answers session of this address. See http://www.tanyaplibersek.com/media_release_australia_s_ailing_foreign_aid_program_takes_another_hit_in_budget (accessed May 15, 2015).
9. Media Release: Australia’s ailing foreign aid program takes another hit in Budget, The Hon Tanya Plibersek MP, Deputy Leader of the Opposition and Shadow Minister for International Affairs and International Development. Wednesday 13 May, 2015.
10. These comments were made in the Questions and Answers session of this address. See http://tanyaplibersek.com/2015/02/2015-australasian-aid-conference/ (accessed May 15, 2015).