Editing Aid effectiveness (section)

=== Logistics ===
[[Humanitarian aid]] is argued to often not reach those who are intended to receive it. For example, a report composed by the World Bank in 2006 stated that an estimated half of the funds donated towards health programs in sub-Saharan Africa did not reach the clinics and hospitals. Money is paid out to fake accounts, prices are increased for transport or warehousing, and drugs are sold to the black market. Another example is in Ghana, where approximately 80% of donations do not go towards their intended purposes. This type of corruption only adds to the criticism of aid, as it is not helping those who need it, and may be adding to the problem.<ref name="Garrett" /> Only about one fifth of U.S. aid goes to countries classified by the OECD as 'least developed.'<ref name="Singer">Singer, Peter. 2009. [[The Life You Can Save]]. New York:Random House.</ref> This "pro-rich" trend is not unique to the United States.<ref name="Sachs" /><ref name="Singer" /> According to Collier, "the middle income countries get aid because they are of much more commercial and political interest than the tiny markets and powerlessness of the bottom billion."<ref name="Collier">{{Cite book |last=Collier |first=Paul |url=https://archive.org/details/bottombillionwhy00coll_0 |title=The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries are Failing and What Can Be Done About It |date=25 May 2007 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=9780199740949 |language=en |url-access=registration}}</ref> What this means is that, at the most basic level, aid is not targeting the most extreme poverty.<ref name="Sachs" /><ref name="Singer" />

The logistics in which the delivery of humanitarian occurs can be problematic. For example, an earthquake in 2003 in [[Bam, Iran]] left tens of thousands of people in need of disaster zone aid. Although aid was flown in rapidly, regional belief systems, cultural backgrounds and even language seemed to have been omitted as a source of concern. Items such as religiously prohibited pork, and non-generic forms of medicine that lacked multilingual instructions came flooding in as relief. An implementation of aid can easily be problematic, causing more problems than it solves.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Habibzadeh |first1=Farrokh |last2=Yadollahie |first2=Mahboobeh |last3=Kucheki |first3=Maryam |date=August 2008 |title=International aid in disaster zones: help or headache? |journal=The Lancet |volume=372 |issue=9636 |pages=374 |doi=10.1016/s0140-6736(08)61157-5 |issn=0140-6736 |pmid=18675688 |s2cid=50115 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

Considering transparency, the amount of aid that is recorded accurately has risen from 42% in 2005 to 48% in 2007.<ref name="Economist" />