Objectivos de Desenvolvimento do Milénio
WHAT ABOUT PORTUGAL?
At the Millennium Summit in 2000, world leaders committed themselves to the achievement of 8 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015. Both rich and poor countries agreed to work towards the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger, the elimination of gender inequalities, the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS, protection of our environment, and the provision of education, healthcare and clean water. Since then the MDGs have had a catalytic effect on global development because of their simplicity, accessibility, and because progress against them is easily monitored.
The MDGs involve a Global Deal between rich and poor countries: poor countries pledged to reform policies, improve governance, and to channel resources to the achievement of the first 7 Goals. Rich countries, for their part, promised to deliver more and more effective aid, faster and deeper debt relief, and fairer trade rules. Rich country commitments are, in particular, outlined in the 8th Goal.
So how well is Portugal doing in meeting its part of the Global Deal?
Portugal’s record on aid
Aid volume
· In 2006 Portugal was the third worst performing country among the EU 15 member states on aid volume, with only Italy and Greece behind. Portugal’s official development assistance (ODA) represented only 0.21% of national income (or GNI). Moreover, Portugal is far behind the average effort of EU-15 donor countries which stood at 0.51% of GNI. This also means that Portugal failed to meet its commitment to achieve 0.33% ODA/GNI by 2006.
· In absolute volume, Portuguese ODA was $391 million in 2006, which was less than half the size of Ireland’s aid budget in the same year, even though Ireland’s population is less than half the size of Portugal’s.
· In May 2005, Portugal joined other EU-15 countries in a commitment to increase ODA and achieve the international target of 0.7% of GNI by 2015. The EU-15 set a minimum intermediate target of 0.51% for individual countries for 2010. Unlike other EU-15 countries, Portugal has not yet announced a detailed implementation schedule for achieving this commitment.
While Portugal failed to meet its target of 0.33% ODA/GNI in 2006, the Portuguese government intends to make a serious effort to reach 0.51% by 2010 as per its European commitment. Nevertheless, political will at all levels is necessary to achieve Portugal’s commitments.
Portugal’s commitment to increasing aid volumes in future years is good news, but planned increases represent significant budgetary and administrative challenges, given the underlying trend of aid flows. The OECD suggests that Portugal should announce a time-bound implementation plan for the growth of ODA. In particular, they recommend that this plan focus on resource mobilisation and allocations to activities that have a clear poverty orientation.
Until such time as the capacity can be built to translate increases in ODA into effective poverty-focused bilateral programmes, the Portuguese authorities should consider channelling increases in funding through multilateral agencies and initiatives.
Aid quality
· Portugal can be commended for the high share of its ODA going to low-income countries. In fact, Portuguese assistance generally concentrates on a handful of very poor countries, with 93% of Portuguese ODA in 2004/05 allocated to least-developed countries (LDCs).
· 88% of Portugal’s ODA went to sub-Saharan Africa in 2004-05. The focus on this region reflects an on-going concentration of Portuguese ODA in lusophone countries, although the figures for 2004-05 are exaggerated by a very large debt relief operation in favour of Angola. Angola received the bulk of Portugal’s aid in this period, which was over 8 times higher than the second largest recipient.
· Portugal has not yet fully untied its aid from the purchase of Portuguese goods and services. Nevertheless, Portugal is complying with the OECD recommendation to untie aid to LDCs. It has made good progress in untying this aid with only 1% of aid to LDCs was still tied in 2004.
In November 2005, the Council of Ministers approved the new Portuguese strategy for development cooperation entitled “A strategic vision for Portuguese cooperation.” This strategy includes a commitment to the MDGs as one of the five guiding principles of development cooperation. This new strategy is a welcome step forward, but the OECD notes that Portugal faces significant implementation challenges in reorienting its aid programme in line with this strategy. These overall challenges include managing the increase in aid flows in line with commitments while strengthening the poverty focus of aid.
The OECD notes that increasing the poverty focus of Portugal’s aid requires the development of a systematic and consistent approach to poverty reduction based on poverty needs assessments, and an adjustment of policies and practices across the board.
In order to implement its new cooperation strategy, the OECD suggests that Portugal undertake a strategic review of ODA allocations, develop and implement a multi-year, results-based action plan to implement the new development strategy, and adopt methodological innovations to better link development objectives, inputs, outputs and results. Such a multi-year programming process would increase the predictability of aid for both partner countries and implementing agencies.
The key actor in Portuguese aid is the Portuguese Institute for Development Support (IPAD). IPAD is part of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and was created in 2003 as the central body responsible for the planning, supervision and coordination of Portuguese aid. Despite IPAD’s formal lead role, a multiplicity of informal processes bring a wide array of actors from line ministries into direct contact with their counterparts in partner countries leading to a very fragmented aid programme. The implementation of Portuguese aid involves many actors including 15 different ministries, 308 municipal governments, universities and other public institutions. The diffuse nature of cooperation poses challenges at all levels for the coherence, coordination, management and reform of Portuguese aid.
To increase aid effectiveness IPAD needs to be given control over the bilateral aid budget. And, to increase the effectiveness of coordination, management and oversight, IPAD must shift from an administrative approach to a more strategic and development cooperation-oriented culture. This will require more appropriate technical development expertise, both at headquarters and at country level. At present, IPAD has a small staff, is not represented at country level and few staff have the background necessary to deal with the complex challenges facing Portugal’s development cooperation programme.
The new Portuguese strategy for cooperation maintains the geographic focus of cooperation efforts on the Portuguese speaking countries of Africa and Timor Leste. In turn the sectoral and thematic priorities for Portuguese aid are based on Portugal’s comparative advantages in these priority countries. Priority sectors include education, good governance, participation and democracy; sustainable development and the fight against poverty. Nevertheless, the OECD note that within these broad priority sectors there needs to be a clearer integration of the MDGs to ensure that poverty reduction is pursued.
A concrete example of how poverty reduction objectives need to be better integrated into the aid programme is the education sector. Education absorbs a large share of technical cooperation in the form of imputed student costs and scholarships. In 2003, these two categories absorbed 37% of technical cooperation disbursements. The OECD notes that bringing foreign students to Portugal to study is costly in absolute terms and has high opportunity costs in terms of the developmental gains foregone, especially when Portugal’s partner countries have pressing needs at all educational levels. Moreover these programmes have questionable – and even negative - development benefits for developing countries. More generally, the OECD suggests that the Portuguese authorities broaden their approach to education, linking it more closely to poverty reduction, and building institutional capacity at all levels. Portugal should analyse needs of the education systems of its priority countries and address them in the context of national education strategies in collaboration with partner governments and other donors.
In terms of aid modalities, debt relief and technical cooperation have dominated Portuguese assistance in recent years. By contrast, project and programme aid were only 2% of gross bilateral disbursements in recent years. Portugal’s participation in sector and budget support programmes – even in its priority countries where aid is nominally supporting poverty reduction strategies - is severely constrained by its budget planning and programming process and limited aid management presence in the field.
Portugal is signed up to the 2003 Rome Declaration on the harmonization of aid practices, and to the more broad-ranging 2005 Paris Declaration on aid effectiveness. However, like many other donors, Portugal has a long way to go in reforming its aid administration and practice to improve the effectiveness of its aid. While Portugal does have an action plan for implementation on harmonisation and alignment this action plan needs to be updated and broadened, it needs to specify implementation time frames and to identify the entities responsible for implementation. Ultimately though, the OECD notes that real progress in aid effectiveness will require the adoption of new aid delivery mechanisms, increasing the predictability of aid disbursements and decentralising decision making and human resources to the country level.
The Portuguese authorities need to delegate greater authority to embassies, empower them with resources and the authority to make decisions closer to field realities and to collaborate actively with other donors. At the country level, Portugal faces the challenge of developing a common vision and operational framework for collaborating with other donors.
Portugal’s record on debt relief
Debt relief has formed a major part of Portuguese bilateral ODA in recent years. This relief has been either linked to restructuring operations negotiated within the Paris Club or has been decided upon bilaterally based on the income level and level of indebtedness of the debtor country. In particular, Portugal has granted much debt relief to lusophone African countries.
Portugal’s record on trade
As part of the European Union, Portugal implements the European Union’s common agricultural and trade policies. These policies are implemented and initiated by the European Commission but heavily influenced by Member States.
Overall Portugal supports reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and of the world trading system in order to better take into account the interests of developing countries.
Most problematic are EU agricultural policies which provide subsidies for both the production and export of agricultural commodities, which lower world prices and limit earning opportunities for farmers and rural communities in poor countries. Support levels are slowly declining as a result of gradual reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. Nevertheless, in 2005, public support for producers in the EU still represented 32% of gross farm receipts - this is above the OECD average. And total support to the agricultural sector costs the EU countries 1.1% of GDP. Considering that the EU-15 spent only 0.43% of their combined national income on ODA in 2006, the level of agricultural support is staggering.
There is a gradual shift towards the use of less-distorting forms of agricultural producer support, notably a shift away from market price support and output-based payments, but these still form the majority of support.
As part of the Doha “Development” Round trade negotiations at the World Trade Organisation in December 2005 in Hong Kong, the EU committed to eliminating export subsidies by 2013. This was not much of a concession for the EU, given that it was set to eliminate the majority of these subsidies by that date under on-going reforms of the EU Common Agricultural Policy. However, even this minimal commitment now has a question mark hanging over it given the continued slow progress in the trade talks. It should be noted that EU resistance to opening up its agricultural markets continues to be one of the ongoing tensions in negotiations.
Almost all exports from the least developed countries face duty- and tariff-free access to the European Union market. While there are only a few exceptions to this free market access, three products which are important agricultural products for poor countries - sugar, rice and bananas – were excluded until 2009 in order to appease vested interests in the EU.
In addition, strict rules still make it difficult for goods from poor countries to gain access to the EU market. In the textiles sector, for example, rules of origin prevent poor countries that import fabric to produce clothing from exporting this clothing to the EU. Despite its overall preference for pro-development policies, Portugal, along with Italy, is resistant to changing the problematic policy on rules of origin.
For poor countries which are not among the least developed, market access can still be restricted due to high tariffs, particularly on manufactured goods where tariffs on poor country exports are often higher than equivalent tariffs on goods from rich countries.
Policy coherence for development and Portugal’s overall commitment to development
The OECD suggests that Portugal adopts policy coherence for development as a government objective, and clarifies the role that the Council of Ministers for Cooperation and the Institute for Development Support (IPAD) might play in promoting coherence across government. Moreover, the OECD suggests that there needs to be more analytical capacity and greater human resources in IPAD in order to allow it to play the necessary role in promoting policy coherence for development across government.
The Centre for Global Development (CGD) ranks 21 of the world’s richest countries based on their dedication to policies that benefit poor nations. CGD’s “Commitment to Development Index” (CDI) looks at seven policy areas important to developing countries: aid, trade, investment, migration, environment, security and technology.
CGD’s 2006 Commitment to Development Index ranks Portugal close to the bottom at 16th place among the 21 countries reviewed. Portugal’s low ranking reflects the very small share of its income that it provides in foreign aid, and the fact that it is the least open of countries covered by the Index to developing country migrants. On the other hand, Portugal has a strong environmental record from a developing country perspective.
Portuguese public opinion
In recent years, Portugal had made some improvements in the dissemination of development cooperation information. In addition Portugal’s new strategy for development cooperation has made education for development a key priority, including in school curricula. Yet, the OECD notes that the public debate on development cooperation in Portugal and public knowledge of development results are limited. Therefore, the OECD recommends that IPAD implement a communications strategy with adequate funding to foster greater understanding of, and public support for, development cooperation.
The OECD also notes that there is strong parliamentary consensus on the government’s new strategy for development co-operation and on the need to raise aid volumes to meet the MDGs. Yet, the OECD notes that pressure to show results on development cooperation has not been very strong in Portugal when compared with other OECD donor countries.
Updated: 6 April 2007
Principal sources: OECD (2007): 2006 Development Cooperation Report; OECD (2006): DAC peer review of Portugal; OECD (2006): Implementing the 2001 DAC Recommendation for Untying Official Development Assistance to the Least Developed Countries: 2006 Progress Report to the High Level Meeting; WTO (2006): World Trade Report; OECD (2006): Agricultural policies in OECD countries: At A Glance 2006; Centre for Global Development (2006): Commitment to Development Index Country Report: Portugal.
Link,http://www.endpoverty2015.org/files/WA%20-%20Portugal%20-%2006-04-07%20-%20posted.doc , consultado a 16 de Outubro de 2007.
WHAT ABOUT PORTUGAL?
At the Millennium Summit in 2000, world leaders committed themselves to the achievement of 8 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015. Both rich and poor countries agreed to work towards the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger, the elimination of gender inequalities, the prevention and treatment of HIV/AIDS, protection of our environment, and the provision of education, healthcare and clean water. Since then the MDGs have had a catalytic effect on global development because of their simplicity, accessibility, and because progress against them is easily monitored.
The MDGs involve a Global Deal between rich and poor countries: poor countries pledged to reform policies, improve governance, and to channel resources to the achievement of the first 7 Goals. Rich countries, for their part, promised to deliver more and more effective aid, faster and deeper debt relief, and fairer trade rules. Rich country commitments are, in particular, outlined in the 8th Goal.
So how well is Portugal doing in meeting its part of the Global Deal?
Portugal’s record on aid
Aid volume
· In 2006 Portugal was the third worst performing country among the EU 15 member states on aid volume, with only Italy and Greece behind. Portugal’s official development assistance (ODA) represented only 0.21% of national income (or GNI). Moreover, Portugal is far behind the average effort of EU-15 donor countries which stood at 0.51% of GNI. This also means that Portugal failed to meet its commitment to achieve 0.33% ODA/GNI by 2006.
· In absolute volume, Portuguese ODA was $391 million in 2006, which was less than half the size of Ireland’s aid budget in the same year, even though Ireland’s population is less than half the size of Portugal’s.
· In May 2005, Portugal joined other EU-15 countries in a commitment to increase ODA and achieve the international target of 0.7% of GNI by 2015. The EU-15 set a minimum intermediate target of 0.51% for individual countries for 2010. Unlike other EU-15 countries, Portugal has not yet announced a detailed implementation schedule for achieving this commitment.
While Portugal failed to meet its target of 0.33% ODA/GNI in 2006, the Portuguese government intends to make a serious effort to reach 0.51% by 2010 as per its European commitment. Nevertheless, political will at all levels is necessary to achieve Portugal’s commitments.
Portugal’s commitment to increasing aid volumes in future years is good news, but planned increases represent significant budgetary and administrative challenges, given the underlying trend of aid flows. The OECD suggests that Portugal should announce a time-bound implementation plan for the growth of ODA. In particular, they recommend that this plan focus on resource mobilisation and allocations to activities that have a clear poverty orientation.
Until such time as the capacity can be built to translate increases in ODA into effective poverty-focused bilateral programmes, the Portuguese authorities should consider channelling increases in funding through multilateral agencies and initiatives.
Aid quality
· Portugal can be commended for the high share of its ODA going to low-income countries. In fact, Portuguese assistance generally concentrates on a handful of very poor countries, with 93% of Portuguese ODA in 2004/05 allocated to least-developed countries (LDCs).
· 88% of Portugal’s ODA went to sub-Saharan Africa in 2004-05. The focus on this region reflects an on-going concentration of Portuguese ODA in lusophone countries, although the figures for 2004-05 are exaggerated by a very large debt relief operation in favour of Angola. Angola received the bulk of Portugal’s aid in this period, which was over 8 times higher than the second largest recipient.
· Portugal has not yet fully untied its aid from the purchase of Portuguese goods and services. Nevertheless, Portugal is complying with the OECD recommendation to untie aid to LDCs. It has made good progress in untying this aid with only 1% of aid to LDCs was still tied in 2004.
In November 2005, the Council of Ministers approved the new Portuguese strategy for development cooperation entitled “A strategic vision for Portuguese cooperation.” This strategy includes a commitment to the MDGs as one of the five guiding principles of development cooperation. This new strategy is a welcome step forward, but the OECD notes that Portugal faces significant implementation challenges in reorienting its aid programme in line with this strategy. These overall challenges include managing the increase in aid flows in line with commitments while strengthening the poverty focus of aid.
The OECD notes that increasing the poverty focus of Portugal’s aid requires the development of a systematic and consistent approach to poverty reduction based on poverty needs assessments, and an adjustment of policies and practices across the board.
In order to implement its new cooperation strategy, the OECD suggests that Portugal undertake a strategic review of ODA allocations, develop and implement a multi-year, results-based action plan to implement the new development strategy, and adopt methodological innovations to better link development objectives, inputs, outputs and results. Such a multi-year programming process would increase the predictability of aid for both partner countries and implementing agencies.
The key actor in Portuguese aid is the Portuguese Institute for Development Support (IPAD). IPAD is part of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and was created in 2003 as the central body responsible for the planning, supervision and coordination of Portuguese aid. Despite IPAD’s formal lead role, a multiplicity of informal processes bring a wide array of actors from line ministries into direct contact with their counterparts in partner countries leading to a very fragmented aid programme. The implementation of Portuguese aid involves many actors including 15 different ministries, 308 municipal governments, universities and other public institutions. The diffuse nature of cooperation poses challenges at all levels for the coherence, coordination, management and reform of Portuguese aid.
To increase aid effectiveness IPAD needs to be given control over the bilateral aid budget. And, to increase the effectiveness of coordination, management and oversight, IPAD must shift from an administrative approach to a more strategic and development cooperation-oriented culture. This will require more appropriate technical development expertise, both at headquarters and at country level. At present, IPAD has a small staff, is not represented at country level and few staff have the background necessary to deal with the complex challenges facing Portugal’s development cooperation programme.
The new Portuguese strategy for cooperation maintains the geographic focus of cooperation efforts on the Portuguese speaking countries of Africa and Timor Leste. In turn the sectoral and thematic priorities for Portuguese aid are based on Portugal’s comparative advantages in these priority countries. Priority sectors include education, good governance, participation and democracy; sustainable development and the fight against poverty. Nevertheless, the OECD note that within these broad priority sectors there needs to be a clearer integration of the MDGs to ensure that poverty reduction is pursued.
A concrete example of how poverty reduction objectives need to be better integrated into the aid programme is the education sector. Education absorbs a large share of technical cooperation in the form of imputed student costs and scholarships. In 2003, these two categories absorbed 37% of technical cooperation disbursements. The OECD notes that bringing foreign students to Portugal to study is costly in absolute terms and has high opportunity costs in terms of the developmental gains foregone, especially when Portugal’s partner countries have pressing needs at all educational levels. Moreover these programmes have questionable – and even negative - development benefits for developing countries. More generally, the OECD suggests that the Portuguese authorities broaden their approach to education, linking it more closely to poverty reduction, and building institutional capacity at all levels. Portugal should analyse needs of the education systems of its priority countries and address them in the context of national education strategies in collaboration with partner governments and other donors.
In terms of aid modalities, debt relief and technical cooperation have dominated Portuguese assistance in recent years. By contrast, project and programme aid were only 2% of gross bilateral disbursements in recent years. Portugal’s participation in sector and budget support programmes – even in its priority countries where aid is nominally supporting poverty reduction strategies - is severely constrained by its budget planning and programming process and limited aid management presence in the field.
Portugal is signed up to the 2003 Rome Declaration on the harmonization of aid practices, and to the more broad-ranging 2005 Paris Declaration on aid effectiveness. However, like many other donors, Portugal has a long way to go in reforming its aid administration and practice to improve the effectiveness of its aid. While Portugal does have an action plan for implementation on harmonisation and alignment this action plan needs to be updated and broadened, it needs to specify implementation time frames and to identify the entities responsible for implementation. Ultimately though, the OECD notes that real progress in aid effectiveness will require the adoption of new aid delivery mechanisms, increasing the predictability of aid disbursements and decentralising decision making and human resources to the country level.
The Portuguese authorities need to delegate greater authority to embassies, empower them with resources and the authority to make decisions closer to field realities and to collaborate actively with other donors. At the country level, Portugal faces the challenge of developing a common vision and operational framework for collaborating with other donors.
Portugal’s record on debt relief
Debt relief has formed a major part of Portuguese bilateral ODA in recent years. This relief has been either linked to restructuring operations negotiated within the Paris Club or has been decided upon bilaterally based on the income level and level of indebtedness of the debtor country. In particular, Portugal has granted much debt relief to lusophone African countries.
Portugal’s record on trade
As part of the European Union, Portugal implements the European Union’s common agricultural and trade policies. These policies are implemented and initiated by the European Commission but heavily influenced by Member States.
Overall Portugal supports reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and of the world trading system in order to better take into account the interests of developing countries.
Most problematic are EU agricultural policies which provide subsidies for both the production and export of agricultural commodities, which lower world prices and limit earning opportunities for farmers and rural communities in poor countries. Support levels are slowly declining as a result of gradual reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. Nevertheless, in 2005, public support for producers in the EU still represented 32% of gross farm receipts - this is above the OECD average. And total support to the agricultural sector costs the EU countries 1.1% of GDP. Considering that the EU-15 spent only 0.43% of their combined national income on ODA in 2006, the level of agricultural support is staggering.
There is a gradual shift towards the use of less-distorting forms of agricultural producer support, notably a shift away from market price support and output-based payments, but these still form the majority of support.
As part of the Doha “Development” Round trade negotiations at the World Trade Organisation in December 2005 in Hong Kong, the EU committed to eliminating export subsidies by 2013. This was not much of a concession for the EU, given that it was set to eliminate the majority of these subsidies by that date under on-going reforms of the EU Common Agricultural Policy. However, even this minimal commitment now has a question mark hanging over it given the continued slow progress in the trade talks. It should be noted that EU resistance to opening up its agricultural markets continues to be one of the ongoing tensions in negotiations.
Almost all exports from the least developed countries face duty- and tariff-free access to the European Union market. While there are only a few exceptions to this free market access, three products which are important agricultural products for poor countries - sugar, rice and bananas – were excluded until 2009 in order to appease vested interests in the EU.
In addition, strict rules still make it difficult for goods from poor countries to gain access to the EU market. In the textiles sector, for example, rules of origin prevent poor countries that import fabric to produce clothing from exporting this clothing to the EU. Despite its overall preference for pro-development policies, Portugal, along with Italy, is resistant to changing the problematic policy on rules of origin.
For poor countries which are not among the least developed, market access can still be restricted due to high tariffs, particularly on manufactured goods where tariffs on poor country exports are often higher than equivalent tariffs on goods from rich countries.
Policy coherence for development and Portugal’s overall commitment to development
The OECD suggests that Portugal adopts policy coherence for development as a government objective, and clarifies the role that the Council of Ministers for Cooperation and the Institute for Development Support (IPAD) might play in promoting coherence across government. Moreover, the OECD suggests that there needs to be more analytical capacity and greater human resources in IPAD in order to allow it to play the necessary role in promoting policy coherence for development across government.
The Centre for Global Development (CGD) ranks 21 of the world’s richest countries based on their dedication to policies that benefit poor nations. CGD’s “Commitment to Development Index” (CDI) looks at seven policy areas important to developing countries: aid, trade, investment, migration, environment, security and technology.
CGD’s 2006 Commitment to Development Index ranks Portugal close to the bottom at 16th place among the 21 countries reviewed. Portugal’s low ranking reflects the very small share of its income that it provides in foreign aid, and the fact that it is the least open of countries covered by the Index to developing country migrants. On the other hand, Portugal has a strong environmental record from a developing country perspective.
Portuguese public opinion
In recent years, Portugal had made some improvements in the dissemination of development cooperation information. In addition Portugal’s new strategy for development cooperation has made education for development a key priority, including in school curricula. Yet, the OECD notes that the public debate on development cooperation in Portugal and public knowledge of development results are limited. Therefore, the OECD recommends that IPAD implement a communications strategy with adequate funding to foster greater understanding of, and public support for, development cooperation.
The OECD also notes that there is strong parliamentary consensus on the government’s new strategy for development co-operation and on the need to raise aid volumes to meet the MDGs. Yet, the OECD notes that pressure to show results on development cooperation has not been very strong in Portugal when compared with other OECD donor countries.
Updated: 6 April 2007
Principal sources: OECD (2007): 2006 Development Cooperation Report; OECD (2006): DAC peer review of Portugal; OECD (2006): Implementing the 2001 DAC Recommendation for Untying Official Development Assistance to the Least Developed Countries: 2006 Progress Report to the High Level Meeting; WTO (2006): World Trade Report; OECD (2006): Agricultural policies in OECD countries: At A Glance 2006; Centre for Global Development (2006): Commitment to Development Index Country Report: Portugal.
Link,http://www.endpoverty2015.org/files/WA%20-%20Portugal%20-%2006-04-07%20-%20posted.doc , consultado a 16 de Outubro de 2007.
Outros Links
