Statistics Luigi Scarpa de Masellis

Transcription

1 Statistics 2004 Luigi Scarpa de Masellis

2 Statistics Table of Contents Statistics 2004 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Canada and Other High Human Development Economies: Selected Indicators (2001) 87 The Developing Countries: Selected Social and Economic Indicators (2001) 89 Canadian Official Development Assistance: Basic Data ( ) 93 Canadian Bilateral Official Development Assistance by Channel and by Country ( ) 97 Canadian Bilateral Official Development Assistance by Sector ( ) 101 Canadian Technical Assistance to Developing Countries (2001) 103 Canadian Multilateral Official Development Assistance by Agency and by Country ( ) 105 Canadian Merchandise Trade Relations with Developing Countries ( ) 109 Canadian Balance of Trade with Developing Countries (2002) 113 Finance and Investment Flows between Canada and Developing Countries (2002) 117 Table 11 Immigration to Canada from Selected Countries ( ) 121 Technical Notes 123

3 Canadian Development Report 2004 Table 1 Canada and Other High Human Development Economies (2001) Human Development Index The UNDP Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite measure of the overall quality of life in a particular country. The index is based on three indices of the level of social wellbeing: GDP per capita, life expectancy at birth, and educational attainment (reflecting literacy rates and enrolment ratios). The Gender-Related Development Index (GDI) adjusts the HDI for inequalities between men and women. In 2001, Canada s quality of life continued to decline, relative to other industrialized countries. Based upon the UNDP s 2003 Human Development Report, Canada drops from third to eighth place in 2001 with an index of 0.937, behind Norway (0.944), Iceland (0.942), Sweden (0.941), Australia (0.939), Netherlands (0.938), Belgium (0.937) and the United States (0.937). Canada s dramatic downward slide appears to be due to a decline in school enrolment ratios. With respect to GDI, Canada is better placed in sixth position with an index of Official Development Assistance and Private Financial Flows Total Official Development Assistance (ODA) flows from OECD countries to developing countries slightly declined from US$53.7 billion in 2000 to US$52.3 billion in 2001, reflecting a 0.5 per cent decrease in real terms. This minor fall in total ODA was mainly the result of a decline in the exchange rates of some currencies against the US dollar. The United States increased its ODA to US$11.4 billion and became, once again, the world s largest donor, a position Japan has held since However, the US ODA/GNI ratio of 0.11 per cent is still the lowest of all 22 Development Assistance Committee (DAC) Member Countries. Japan remains the second largest donor, losing first place essentially because of the depreciating yen. The average ratio of ODA to Gross National Income (GNI) remained unchanged at 0.22 per cent in 2001 (see Figure 1.1). Canada s ODA declined in real terms by 9.4 per cent while its ODA/GNI ratio slipped from 0.25 to 0.22 per cent, ranking it 19th out of the 22 DAC Member Countries. While Canada s rank hovers exactly on the average, it is once again clearly below comparable donors in size such as Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, and Sweden (1.03, 0.83, 0.82, and 0.81 per cent, respectively) and again Figure 1.1 Net ODA as Percentage of GNI of the DAC Members (2001) Denmark (1.03) (0.83) (0.82) (0.82) (0.81) (0.37) (0.34) (0.33) (0.32) (0.32) (0.32) (0.30) (0.29) (0.27) (0.25) (0.25) (0.25) (0.23) (0.22) (0.17) (0.15) (0.11) (0.22) Norway Netherlands Luxembourg Sweden Belgium Switzerland Ireland France United Kingdom Finland Spain Austria Germany Australia New Zealand Portugal Japan Canada Greece Italy United States Total DAC below the majority of the G-7 countries with the exception of Italy (0.15) and the United States (0.11). The above mentioned Nordic countries plus Luxembourg are the only economies meeting the United Nations ODA/GNI target of 0.7 per cent. However, donor countries did commit to increasing their ODA to developing countries in the context of the International Conference on Financing for Development held in Monterrey in March In particular, European Union members committed to increase their collective ODA/GNI ratio to 0.39 by 2006 as a step toward reaching the UN target of 0.7 per cent. DAC countries have committed to raise their ODA/GNI level to 0.24 per cent by Canada will double its ODA (in current Canadian dollars) by 2010 by progressively increasing its aid budget by 8 per cent every year. These pledges will undoubtedly foster a recovery in development aid over the next few years. Global private capital flows (in nominal terms) declined again drastically in In 1999, total flows amounted to US$110.4 billion. In 2000, total flows amounted to US$74.5 billion, but in 2001 dropped to US$49.1 billion. In line with this decline, private capital flows from Canada to developing countries shifted from US$4.6 billion in 2000 to a negative US$12 million in

4 Statistics Table 1 Canada and Other High Human Development Economies (2001) Selected indicators of relations with developing countries Net Private Percent Share Financial UNDP Change ODA/GNI Multi- Share of Share of Total Flows to UNDP Gender- Over Rank lateral Net ODA of Total Imports Developing Human Related GNI Per Total Previous Among Share as Grant to Low Exports to from Countries Development Development Capita Net ODA Year ODA/GNI DAC % of Share of Income Developing Developing (long-term) Index Index (PPP$) (US$ millions) (real terms) Ratio Countries Net ODA Total ODA Countries Countries Countries (US$ millions) Country Canada ,530 1, Australia , Austria , Bahamas ,680 na na na na na na na na Barbados ,110 na na na na na na na na Belgium , Cyprus ,110 na na na na na na na na Denmark ,490 1, Finland , France ,080 4, ,168 Germany ,240 4, Greece , ~ Iceland ,850 ~ ~ ~ na ~ ~ ~ ~ Ireland , Israel ,630 na na na na na na na na Italy ,530 1, ,903 Japan ,550 9, ,380 Luxembourg , ~ Netherlands ,560 3, ,886 New Zealand , Norway ,250 1, Portugal , ,503 Singapore ,710 na na na na na na na na South Korea ,850 ~ ~ ~ na ~ ~ ~ ~ Spain ,860 1, ,640 Sweden ,800 1, ,394 Switzerland , ,252 United Kingdom ,340 4, ,669 United States ,280 11, ,864 Average or Total ,911 52, ,117 Sources: UNDP, Human Development Report 2003 World Bank, World Development Indicators 2003 OECD, Development Assistance Committee (DAC), The DAC Journal: Development Co-operation Report 2002 IMF, Direction of Trade Statistics Yearbook

5 Canadian Development Report 2004 Table 2 The Developing Countries: Selected Social and Economic Indicators (2001) Human Development Index In 2001, the average HDI for all developing countries was As in past years, quality of life conditions were significantly above the average in Eastern Europe (0.791) and the Americas (0.783), marginally above the average in Asia (0.656), and significantly below the average in Africa (0.501). This last figure is not surprising, considering that 33 of the 49 Least Developed Countries (LDCs) are situated in Africa. Quality of life conditions vary significantly between world regions and also within regions. In Africa, the HDI ranges from for Sierra Leone to for Libya. In Asia, the range is from for Yemen to for Malaysia. In the Americas, the index ranges from for Haiti to for Argentina. Finally, in Eastern Europe, the range is smaller, from for Moldova to for Slovenia. In terms of income-based country groupings, LDCs had an average HDI of (0.438 in 2000), while the other low-income countries registered (0.586 in 2000) and the remaining countries (0.732 in 2000). It is to be noted that the majority of countries show little variation in the HDI figures from one year to another and a longer-term comparison would better highlight progress or decline. Figure 2.1 highlights these aggregate HDI levels. External Debt/GNI and Aid/GNI Many developing countries, especially in Africa and South Asia, still show external debt/gni ratios of above 100 per cent. In 2001, the LDCs, most of whom fall into the category of Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs), experienced, in aggregate, external debt/gni ratios of per cent (130.1 per cent in 2000) compared to 77.6 per cent (95.7 in 2000) for the other low-income countries and 51.9 per cent (51.3 in 2000) for the remaining developing countries. This represents an important improvement in the levels of general indebtedness from last year. In terms of world regions, Africa showed on average an external debt/gni ratio of per cent (117.9 per cent in 2000), again clearly above the Americas at 58.6 per cent (65.8), Asia at 62.1 per cent (64.3), and Eastern Europe at 50.6 per cent (55.9) whose ratios are roughly comparable. The average for all developing countries was 82.4 per cent. Figure 2.1 Human Development Index (2001) (0.440) LDCs (0.592) Other Low Income Countries Figure 2.2 Total Debt Service/GNI and Aid/GNI (2001) (3.0) LDCs (15.7) (4.1) (5.5) Other Low Income Countries Aid/GNI Most of the indebted countries are compelled to service their debts. In 2001, debt servicing absorbed 3.0 per cent of LDCs GNI, diverting scarce resources from social and investment expenditures. This was more than offset by aid flows (see Figure 2.2). For other low-income countries, however, aid barely matched debt servicing and in the case of the remaining countries, debt servicing outweighed aid. Total debt service/gni 1 and aid/gni ratios are also highlighted in Figure 2.2. Source: World Bank, World Development Indicators 2003 (0.750) Remaining Countries Total Debt Service/GNI (7.3) (2.1) Remaining Countries 88

6 Statistics Table 2 The Developing Countries: Selected Social and Economic Indicators (2001) GDP/Capita Under-5 UNDP Gender- Growth Adult Mortality UNDP Human Related Average Over Literacy Rate External Development Development GNI Per GDP Previous Year Population Rate (per 1,000 Debt/GNI Index Index Capita (PPP$) (US$ millions) (%) (millions) (%) live births) (%) Aid/GNI (%) Country AFRICA Algeria ,160 54, Angola ~ 1,510 9, Benin , Botswana ,530 5, Burkina Faso , Burundi Cameroon ,590 8, Cape Verde , Central African Republic , Chad , Comoros , Congo, Dem. Rep. of , Congo, Rep. of , Côte d Ivoire ,460 10, Djibouti ~ 2, Egypt ,640 98, Equatorial Guinea ~ 5,680 1, Eritrea Ethiopia , Gabon ~ 5,250 4, Gambia , Ghana ,940 5, Guinea ~ 1,930 3, Guinea-Bissau Kenya , Lesotho , Liberia ~ ~ ~ Libya ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Madagascar , Malawi , Mali , Mauritania ,690 1, Mauritius ,120 4, Morocco ,560 33, Mozambique ~ 3, Namibia ,530 3, ~ 3.4 Niger , Nigeria , Rwanda ,130 1, São Tomé and Principe ~ ~ Senegal ,500 4, Seychelles ~ ~ Sierra Leone ~ Somalia ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ South Africa , , Sudan ,550 12, Swaziland ,500 1, Tanzania , Togo ,410 1, Tunisia ,190 19, Uganda ,260 5, Zambia , Zimbabwe ,260 9, Total Africa , ,

7 Canadian Development Report 2004 Table 2 (continued) GDP/Capita Under-5 UNDP Gender- Growth Adult Mortality UNDP Human Related Average Over Literacy Rate External Development Development GNI Per GDP Previous Year Population Rate (per 1,000 Debt/GNI Index Index Capita (PPP$) (US$ millions) (%) (millions) (%) live births) (%) Aid/GNI (%) Country AMERICAS Antigua and Barbuda ~ 9, ~ 1.3 Argentina , , Belize , Bolivia ,280 7, Brazil , , Chile ,030 66, Colombia ,830 82, Costa Rica ,130 16, Cuba ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dominica ~ 4, Dominican Republic ,680 21, Ecuador ,070 21, El Salvador ,520 13, Grenada ~ 6, Guatemala ,880 20, Guyana , Haiti ,620 3, Honduras ,450 6, Jamaica ,520 7, Mexico , , Nicaragua ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Panama ,870 12, Paraguay ,620 6, Peru ,590 54, St Kitts and Nevis ~ 10, St Lucia ~ 5, St Vincent/Grenadines ~ 5, Suriname ~ ~ ~ 3.4 Trinidad and Tobago ,450 9, Uruguay ,450 18, Venezuela , , Total Americas ,079 1,901, ASIA Afghanistan ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Armenia ,680 2, Azerbaijan ~ 2,640 5, Bangladesh ,670 46, Bhutan ~ ~ Cambodia ,540 3, China ,070 1,159, East Timor ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Georgia ~ 2,070 3, India , , Indonesia , , Iran , , Iraq ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Jordan ,960 8, Kazakhstan ,940 22, Kyrgyzstan ~ 1,530 1, Laos ,560 1, Lebanon ,460 16, Malaysia ,060 88, Maldives ~ ~ Mongolia ,600 1, Myanmar (Burma) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Nepal ,380 5,

8 Statistics GDP/Capita Under-5 UNDP Gender- Growth Adult Mortality UNDP Human Related Average Over Literacy Rate External Development Development GNI Per GDP Previous Year Population Rate (per 1,000 Debt/GNI ASIA (continued) Index Index Capita (PPP$) (US$ millions) (%) (millions) (%) live births) (%) Aid/GNI (%) Country North Korea ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Pakistan ,890 58, Philippines ,150 71, Sri Lanka ,310 15, Syria ,210 19, Tajikistan , Thailand , , Turkey , , Turkmenistan ~ 4,030 5, ~ 1.2 Uzbekistan ,530 11, Vietnam ,100 32, West Bank and Gaza ~ ~ 3, ~ 19.1 Yemen , Total Asia ,324 2,593, , EASTERN EUROPE Albania ,870 4, Belarus ,030 12, Bosnia Herzegovina ~ 5,620 4, Bulgaria ,480 13, Croatia ,210 19, Czech Republic ,100 57, Estonia ,400 5, Hungary ,290 51, Latvia ,290 7, Lithuania ,180 11, Macedonia, FYR ~ 6,160 3, Moldova ,440 1, Poland , , Romania ,970 39, Russian Federation , , Serbia and Montenegro ~ ~ ~ 11, Slovak Republic ,600 20, Slovenia ,070 18, ~ 0.7 Ukraine ,380 38, Total Eastern Europe , , Total Developing Countries ,801 5,834, , Of which: LDCs , , Other Low Income Countries , , , Remaining Countries ,453 4,800, , Total High Human Development Countries ,911 24,155, na na Sources: UNDP, Human Development Report 2003 World Bank, World Development Indicators 2003 Note: Bold-italicized countries are not ODA eligible (see Technical Notes) but official assistance (OA) to these countries was used in constructing Column

9 Canadian Development Report 2004 Table 3 Canadian Official Development Assistance: Basic Data ( ) In the fiscal year, Canadian bilateral aid disbursements accounted for C$2, million or 69.9 per cent of total ODA, while multilateral disbursements accounted for C$ million or 30.1 per cent. Although these disbursements remained virtually unchanged in terms of volume and channel allocation, as pointed out in Table 1, Canada s total aid declined again from 0.25 per cent of GNI in 2000 to 0.22 per cent in In 2002, however, the ratio climbed back to 0.28 per cent, confirming Canada s renewed pledges to developing countries. 1 The longer-term trend of declining ODA/GNI ratio reflects a decline in real terms in the absolute amounts of Canadian aid since the mid-1980s. As Table 2 shows, from 1991 to 2001, bilateral ODA fell annually by 4.1 per cent for Africa, 3.0 per cent for the Americas, and 4.0 per cent for Asia. In terms of country groupings by income, bilateral ODA declined annually by 3.2 per cent for LDCs, 1.0 per cent for other low-income countries, and 4.8 per cent for the remaining countries. In 2001, LDCs obtained a 30.2 per cent share of Canadian bilateral aid (C$ million) compared to 29.5 per cent in 1991 (C$ million in current prices) but a higher, 40.9 per cent, share of Canadian aid via multilateral organizations. The relatively low share of bilateral disbursements to LDCs confirms Canada s broad range of aid commitments and geographical interests (see Figure 3.1). Canada s geographical dispersion of aid has been a long-standing issue. CIDA has had aid programs in 30 core countries but has been involved in as many as 100 countries. In December 2002, CIDA announced as part of its new strategy, Canada Making a Difference in the World: a Policy Statement on Strengthening Aid Effectiveness, that it would focus its development cooperation program on nine countries: Bangladesh, Bolivia, Ethiopia, Ghana, Honduras, Mali, Mozambique, Senegal, and Tanzania. Canadian aid will continue to be available for other countries, but the greater share of incremental funding coming into the Agency will be allocated to these nine countries. These countries presently receive C$ million or 16.6 per cent of bilateral aid. This share should increase as a result of the new policy. Also, the government committed in the 2003 Budget to contribute half of all future increases in Canadian international assistance to Africa. Figure 3.1 Total Canadian Bilateral Allocated ODA ( ) C$ millions (393.52) LDCs (372.30) Other Low Income Countries In , Canada s bilateral and multilateral disbursements to the top 10 recipient countries accounted for 39.3 per cent (C$ million) of the total allocated. Of these 10 countries, six are located in Asia (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, China, India, Pakistan, and Vietnam), two in Eastern Europe (Poland and ex-yugoslavia), and two in Africa (Cameroon and Ethiopia). Recently, Canada s aid relationship with India has seen a radical transformation. India has decided to end its status as an aid recipient from Canada, as well as other developed countries, in order to enhance its stature in the global community. This represents a significant achievement and other more advanced developing countries such as China might be close to graduating from aid on the basis of their considerable socio-economic and technological progress in recent years. Figure 3.1 shows how Canadian bilateral aid flows are allocated to different groups of countries based on income classification. The largest flows are still directed to the remaining countries (C$ million) and not to the LDCs (C$ million) and the other low-income countries (C$ million), underlining the characteristic lack of concentration on the poorest countries. 1 OECD, DAC press release, April 22, (538.88) Remaining Countries 92

10 Statistics Table 3 Canadian Official Development Assistance: Basic Data ( ) (In millions of Canadian dollars) Bilateral Rank of Rank of Recipient Canada Among Country for Real % DAC Bilateral Total Total Total Canadian Aid Total Total Change Per Donors in Multilateral Canadian Aid (including multilateral) Bilateral Bilateral Year Recipient Country (all agencies) (all sources) (if in top 50) (2001 prices) Country AFRICA Algeria Angola Benin Botswana Burkina Faso Burundi Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Comoros na Congo, Dem. Rep. of Congo, Rep. of Côte d Ivoire Djibouti Egypt Equatorial Guinea Eritrea 4.10 na na Ethiopia Gabon Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Liberia Libya na 0 0 Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritania Mauritius Morocco Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Rwanda São Tomé and Principe Senegal Seychelles Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa Sudan Swaziland Tanzania Togo Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe Regional Africa ~ Sub-Saharan Africa subtotal Total Africa

11 Canadian Development Report 2004 Table 3 (continued) Bilateral Rank of Rank of Recipient Canada Among Country for Real % DAC Bilateral Total Total Total Canadian Aid Total Total Change Per Donors in Multilateral Canadian Aid (including multilateral) Bilateral Bilateral Year Recipient Country (all agencies) (all sources) (if in top 50) (2001 prices) Country AMERICAS Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Belize Bolivia Brazil Chile Colombia Costa Rica Cuba Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador El Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Mexico Nicaragua Panama Paraguay Peru St Kitts and Nevis St Lucia St Vincent/Grenadines Suriname Trinidad and Tobago Uruguay Venezuela Regional Central America ~ Regional Caribbean ~ Regional South America ~ Other Americas ~ Total Americas ASIA Afghanistan Armenia 1.14 na na Azerbaijan 1.04 na na Bangladesh Bhutan Cambodia China East Timor 4.72 na na Georgia 1.13 na na India Indonesia Iran na Iraq 0 2 na na Jordan Kazakhstan 1.52 na na Kyrgyzstan 1.47 na na Laos Lebanon Malaysia Maldives Mongolia na

12 Statistics Bilateral Rank of Rank of Recipient Canada Among Country for Real % DAC Bilateral Total Total Total Canadian Aid Total Total Change Per Donors in Multilateral Canadian Aid (including multilateral) Bilateral Bilateral Year Recipient Country (all agencies) (all sources) (if in top 50) ASIA (continued) (2001 prices) Country Myanmar (Burma) Nepal North Korea Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Syria Tajikistan 1.60 na na Thailand Turkey na Turkmenistan 0.40 na na Uzbekistan 0.78 na na Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen Oceania ~ Regional Asia ~ Other Asia na ~ Total Asia EASTERN EUROPE Albania 3.21 na na Belarus 0.03 na na na Bulgaria 1.29 na na na Czech Republic 0.55 na na na Estonia 0.35 na na na Hungary 0.61 na na na Latvia 1.41 na na na Lithuania 1.69 na na na Moldova 0.41 na na Poland na na na Romania 3.53 na na na Russian Federation na na na Slovak Republic 1.12 na na na Ukraine na na na Ex-Yugoslavia na na Other Europe na na ~ Total Eastern Europe na na Total ODA Allocated 1, , , Of which: LDCs Other Low Income Countries Remaining Countries Countries not Specified Unallocable by Country Total ODA 2, , , Note: Bold-italicized countries are not included in Canadian ODA totals (see Technical Notes). Sources: CIDA, Statistical Report on ODA ; CIDA, Annual Report ; OECD, Geographical Distribution of Financial Flows to Aid Recipients,

13 Canadian Development Report 2004 Table 4 Canadian Bilateral Official Development Assistance by Channel and by Country ( ) Canadian bilateral aid comprises both financial and non-financial flows. In the fiscal year , the combined Canadian bilateral ODA, which could be allocated by country, totalled C$1, million. Of this portion, African countries as a whole received C$ million (42.0 per cent), Asia C$ million (31.9 per cent), the Americas C$ million (21.5 per cent), and Eastern Europe C$60.35 million (4.6 per cent). As Figure 4.1 shows, of total ODA allocated, 56.9 per cent or C$ million was governmentto-government aid. Table 4 indicates that the top 10 countries which received the largest amounts of such aid were China, Bangladesh, ex-yugoslavia, Jamaica, Vietnam, Russia, Ukraine, India, the Philippines, and Mali. LDC governments as a group received 28.0 per cent of this type of aid from Canada while other low-income countries and remaining countries received, respectively, 24.3 per cent and 47.7 per cent. Bilateral food aid went mostly to Asian and African countries, namely Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Ethiopia, and Kenya. Three countries benefited from significant official debt relief, namely Poland (C$ million), Cameroon (C$83.32 million), and Bolivia (C$11.10 million). Of total bilateral ODA allocated, 19.2 per cent or C$ million, flowed through CIDA s Partnership Branch, which includes Institutional Cooperation (ICD), NGOs (national and international), and International Humanitarian Assistance (IHA). Almost 44 per cent of the ODA allocated through Partnership Branch was channeled through nongovernmental organizations. The other remaining channels such as International Humanitarian Assistance, the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), the Rights & Democracy (ICHRDD), and the Commonwealth Scholarships account for 9.3 per cent altogether. Canada is still a very poor performer when it comes to tied aid. According to the DAC 2002 Report, 68.3 per cent of Canadian bilateral aid was tied in Figure 4.1 Canadian Bilateral ODA by Channel ( ) Government-to-Government Aid (56.9%) Bilateral Food Aid (7.2%) Official Debt Relief (8.6%) Institutional Cooperation (ICD) (5.8%) Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) (8.4%) Industrial Cooperation Program (INC) (3.8%) International Humanitarian Assistance (IHA) (6.5%) International Development Research Centre (IDRC) (2.4%) Other Rights and Democracy (ICHRDD), Commonwealth Scholarships (0.4%) 2001 (75.1 per cent in 2000 and 67.1 per cent in 1999) compared to the total DAC member average of 17.8 per cent (16.2 per cent in 2000 and 22.1 per cent in 1999). Canada is the third highest tied donor behind Italy and Greece (third highest as well in 2000, behind Spain and the US). However, the new strategy framework, Canada Making a Difference in the World: a Policy Statement on Strengthening Aid Effectiveness, rescinded CIDA s earlier policy which placed a ceiling on untying, and adopted the 2000 OECD-DAC agreement on untying aid to the Least Developed Countries. 96

14 Statistics Table 4 Canadian Bilateral Official Development Assistance by Channel and by Country ( ) (In millions of Canadian dollars ) Partnership Branch International Centre International for Human Rank of Official Industrial International Development Rights and Government-to Recipient Bilateral Bilateral Institutional Non-governmental Cooperation Humanitarian Research Democratic Government Country Food Debt Cooperation Organizations Program Assistance Centre Development Commonwealth Aid (if in top 30) Aid Relief (ICD) (NGOs) (INC) (IHA) (IDRC) (ICHRDD) Scholarships Total Country AFRICA Algeria Angola Benin Botswana Burkina Faso Burundi Cameroon Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Comoros Congo, Dem. Rep. Of Congo, Rep. Of Côte d Ivoire Djibouti Egypt Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Ethiopia Gabon Gambia Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Liberia Libya Madagascar Malawi Mali Mauritania Mauritius Morocco Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Rwanda São Tomé and Principe Senegal Seychelles Sierra Leone Somalia South Africa Sudan Swaziland Tanzania Togo Tunisia Uganda Zambia Zimbabwe Regional Africa Sub-Saharan Africa subtotal Total Africa

15 Canadian Development Report 2004 Table 4 (continued) Partnership Branch International Centre International for Human Rank of Official Industrial International Development Rights and Government-to Recipient Bilateral Bilateral Institutional Non-governmental Cooperation Humanitarian Research Democratic Government Country Food Debt Cooperation Organizations Program Assistance Centre Development Commonwealth Aid (if in top 30) Aid Relief (ICD) (NGOs) (INC) (IHA) (IDRC) (ICHRDD) Scholarships Total Country AMERICAS Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Belize Bolivia Brazil Chile Colombia Costa Rica Cuba Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador El Salvador Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Jamaica Mexico Nicaragua Panama Paraguay Peru St Kitts and Nevis St Lucia St Vincent/Grenadines Suriname Trinidad and Tobago Uruguay Venezuela Regional Central America Regional Caribbean Regional South America Other Americas Total Americas ASIA Afghanistan Armenia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Bhutan Cambodia China East Timor Georgia India Indonesia Iran Iraq Jordan Kazakhstan Kyrgyzstan Laos Lebanon Malaysia Maldives Mongolia

16 Statistics Partnership Branch International Centre International for Human Rank of Official Industrial International Development Rights and Government-to Recipient Bilateral Bilateral Institutional Non-governmental Cooperation Humanitarian Research Democratic Government Country Food Debt Cooperation Organizations Program Assistance Centre Development Commonwealth ASIA (continued) Aid (if in top 30) Aid Relief (ICD) (NGOs) (INC) (IHA) (IDRC) (ICHRDD) Scholarships Total Country Myanmar (Burma) Nepal North Korea Pakistan Philippines Sri Lanka Syria Tajikistan Thailand Turkey Turkmenistan Uzbekistan Vietnam West Bank and Gaza Yemen Oceania Regional Asia Other Asia Total Asia EASTERN EUROPE Albania Belarus Bulgaria Czech Republic Estonia Hungary Latvia Lithuania Moldova Poland Romania Russian Federation Slovak Republic Ukraine Ex-Yugoslavia Other Europe Total Eastern Europe Total ODA Allocated , Of which: LDCs Other Low Income Countries Remaining Countries Country not Specified Unallocable by Country na na na na na na na na na na Total ODA , Note: Bold-italicized countries are not included in Canadian ODA totals (see Technical Notes). Source: CIDA, Statistical Report on ODA

17 Canadian Development Report 2004 Table 5 Canadian Bilateral Official Development Assistance by Sector ( ) This table illustrates the sectoral allocation of Canada s bilateral ODA. Figure 5.1 summarizes the distribution between sectors. The main sector supported was social infrastructure with C$658.5 million or 52.3 per cent of total ODA, followed by production with C$144.6 million or 11.5 per cent and commodity general programme assistance with C$137.4 million or 10.9 per cent. Within social infrastructure, education accounted for 12.7 per cent and health for 6.2 per cent (when including water supply and sanitation). Allocations to government and civil society ranked first at 21.7 per cent. Within economic infrastructure, energy accounted for 2.7 per cent, followed by banking and financial services and communications both at 1.8 per cent. Within production, agriculture accounted for 4.8 per cent and industry for 3.4 per cent. CIDA s Social Development Priorities: A Framework for Action, issued in 2000, is a five-year plan with the aim of doubling funding to four priority areas from C$342 million to C$724 million in The plan clearly refers to internationally agreed targets such as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and provides a resource allocation mechanism. There is particular emphasis on basic education and health services for ODA intervention and a shift from supporting physical infrastructure which is still considered a priority area but with high project costs to enhancing the social sector and other areas such as governance and institution building. In the production sectors, the emphasis is on agriculture. This is likely to continue through the implementation of the recent April 2003 policy statement, Promoting Sustainable Rural Development through Agriculture. In terms of allocation by channel, Geographic Programs have accounted for C$943.6 million or 75.0 per cent, Canadian Partnership for C$267.6 million or 21.3 per cent, and IDRC for C$47.1 million or 3.7 per cent. Within Canadian Partnership, NGOs Figure 5.1 Canadian Bilateral ODA by Sector ( ) Social Infrastructure/ Services (52.3%) Economic Infrastructure/ Services (9.2%) Production Sectors (11.5%) Multisector/Crosscutting (9.3%) Commodity General Programme Assistance (10.9%) Emergency Assistance (6.8%) and INGOs also deliver projects funded by the Geographic Programs. Their share as it appears here understates their involvement in CIDA s aid delivery. 100

18 Statistics Table 5 Canadian Bilateral Official Development Assistance by Sector ( ) (In millions of Canadian dollars) Geographic Canadian Subtotal Country- Total Country- Programs Partnership to-country IDRC to-country Industrial NGOs, INGOs, ICD Cooperation $ % $ % $ % $ % $ % $ % SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE/SERVICES Education Education Level Unspecified Basic Education Secondary Education Post-Secondary Education Health Health General Basic Health Population Programs Water Supply and Sanitation Government and Civil Society Other Social Infrastructure and Services Employment Housing Other Social Services Sub-Total ECONOMIC INFRASTRUCTURE/SERVICES Transport and Storage Communications Energy Banking and Financial Services Business and Other Services Sub-Total PRODUCTION SECTORS Agriculture Forestry Fishing Industry Mining Construction Trade Tourism Sub-Total MULTISECTOR/CROSSCUTTING General Environment Protection Other Multisector Sub-Total COMMODITY GENERAL PROGRAMME ASSISTANCE Structural Adjustment Assistance to World Bank/IMF Food Aid Excluding Relief Food Aid Other General Programme and Commodity Sub-Total EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE Non Food Emergency and Distress Relief TOTAL ALLOCATED BY SECTOR , , Note: For convenience, figures on food aid channelled through NGOs are added to NGOs. Source: CIDA, Statistical Report on ODA