The glow of television can be addictive. And under the spotlight, we've watched the world leaders positively radiate with good will this week as they pledged close to $4 billion to help tsunami victims. The sum is so extraordinary that even United Nations emergency relief coordinator Jan Egeland -- known for his outspokenness and gutsy condemnation of cheapskate world leaders -- has been rendered speechless. Practically. The pledges "are coming so often, and they are so big that you really have to reconfirm many times to be sure that you've heard right, that the number of zeros were right," Egeland told reporters at a news conference Wednesday. Still, the practical Norwegian is no dummy. And while temporarily awed, the UN isn't blinded by the figures. Too often, pledges don't translate into the cash that's been promised.

"We never get all the money we are pledged," said Elizabeth Byrs, who coordinates the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs in Geneva. "We always hope that we can transform what is promised into concrete funds. But that's all we can do. We have no means of collecting except to advocate."

So, while the world congratulates itself on its altruism and the public feels assuaged by the high level of charity respective governments have shown, actual aid workers are huddling in tents on the front lines are wondering if world leaders will really put their money where their mouths are. At a meeting of world leaders in Jakarta on Thursday, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan noted there were often "gaps" between what is pledged and what arrives and urged world leaders to make good on their promises. He also insisted the area needs $977 million in direct aid.

Holding countries to their pledges creates a tough moral dilemma for the UN -- how, after all, do you punish nations for not being as generous as they promised to be? If a country rebuilds 1,000 houses rather than the 10,000 promised, don't you still have to be grateful?

"When we get a pledge, we have no mechanism to force the nations to give us the money," Byrs said. The pledge simply arrives in the form of a press release. "But, what can we do with that?" she asks. "How can UNICEF go to a vaccine company and offer to pay for medicine with a press release from a prime minister pledging money?"

USAID, the US government agency responsible for distributing the country's funds for humanitarian and economic assistance around the world, also admits the problem exists. "A lot of countries don't pay. The United States isn't the only one," said spokesperson Harry Edwards.

Where's the cash?

Take the case of Bam, Iran, where one year ago, a 6.5 magnitude earthquake killed close to 30,000 people in 10 seconds. About 5,000 children were orphaned when the more than 2,000 year-old city and tourist Mecca collapsed into a ruin. Ironically, the earthquake also occurred on Dec. 26 -- one year to date -- before the tsunami hit. The world collectively offered $1.1 billion in aid.

But it also quickly forgot. Of the generous amount offered by 44 nations, the UN claims only about $17 million (others say $50 million) has materialized. The over-stretched and cash poor UN, has therefore been unable to carry out its $33 million reconstruction plan. "We ran out of money," Byrs said. "That's why a full year after the earthquake there is still so much left to do." To date, only five percent of houses have been rebuilt and 75,000 survivors are now living in prefab cabins. Carmel colored dust still coats the city. Today, only a handful of international agencies remain.

Liberia fared no better. The UN appeal to help the war-torn West African nation garnered a promise of $1 billion from the international community. The actual sum received? $65 million. How about Central America, to which the world pledged $9 billion in 1998 in the wake of hurricane Mitch? A recent report on the recovery shows that only 30-50 percent of the aid came through.

Will south Asia face the same fate? Probably not in the areas that remain in the media eye and clearly not on the beloved western coasts of Thailand, or the islands of Phuket, Phi Phi and Sri Lanka, where Europeans vacation. These places are sure to be among the first to bustle with new life and to be held up as examples of international charity at work. But what about the hard to reach places -- the places out of tourists view and the media spotlight? What about the orphaned children of Banda Aceh?

Why don't funds arrive?

There are three main reasons why money often doesn't come, said USAID's Evans. First of all, the money is never promised in one single block, but over time. As the work begins, the work that is planned sometimes can't get done. In Bam, for instance, the Iranian government drew up such a complicated rebuilding plan that permanent rebuilding work could not begin for over a year. As such, much of the relief has been restricted to providing temporary solutions. Secondly, a project may be halted if it is not doing what it is designed to do. In those cases, the money is saved for a plan that can work. Thirdly, countries only have so much money to give and well-meaning donors often get distracted by another, more urgent call and the promised money then gets redirected.