The Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), the main delivery agent for Canada's development policy, has undergone a significant change in direction since the Harper government has come to power. A lightning rod for controversy recently has been its new approach to one of the three main pillars or objectives affirmed by the current government - economic growth. In 2011, CIDA announced multiyear, multimillion dollar partnerships with major international non-profit organizations and private mining companies amounting to what some call a subsidization of these companies' corporate social responsibility (CSR) programming. A November 2012 report of a two year study from the House of Commons Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, in a 118 page document, affirmed the need for the two sectors - public and private - to work better together to help poorer countries develop. The million dollar question is how, and to what degree should public monies be used to support activities undertaken by large corporations , especially those that are Canadian or have Canadian interests. Would such projects appear to provide Canadian Government approval to the corporations’ activities in such areas as labour relations, displacement of inhabitants, and environmental impact? Less developed countries, often lack adequate legal frameworks and the capacity to monitor activities and negotiate fair contracts for their countries' precious resources.
On the one hand, critics argue this 'subsidization' of companies is not only ineffective but potentially harmful; recipient countries who look to Canada for a helping hand to strengthen domestic institutions could instead be dragged further into a exploitative relationship where the aid they receive in support is peanuts compared to profits reaped by the developed world mining companies. On the other, the government, supporters and proponents of public-private partnerships maintain that the key to overcoming poverty is through economic growth and, in this particular case, Canada's competitive advantage in mining innovation (the country's main stock market, the TSX, lists the vast majority of the world's mining companies) can well assist poor countries, who often have little else besides their natural resources to rely on for powering economic growth, to reduce poverty and build better public institutions in the process.
Is one side more "right" than the other? What is the evidence supporting each side's contention? Are the two approaches non-complementary? How do other aspects of Canadian development and foreign policy, let alone development policy as a whole, interact with this renewed focus on private sector development, institution building and economic growth? How can Canadian international development professionals, CAIDP, contribute value to both while remaining non-aligned in pursuit of their mission to reduce poverty?
This forum is open to any and all who wish to contribute an opinion, however far reaching, to how the events of the last two years will shape Canadian development policy for years and possibly decades to come...