This honest and damning post by Ilaria Allegrozzi about her reflections on the aid industry is an absolute must read. I admire her ability to speak out about something that many are afraid to address. I agree with her outrage and her sentiments about how NGOs are essentially mushrooming in conflict zones and the developing world — but how many of these new non-profits are doing really important, vital and effective work? Whenever I read about someone else starting up a new non-profit I think — do we need more NGOs or can we work to make existing ones more effective? Are the hundreds of new NGOs replicating efforts? Are they coordinating with one another or each trying to do their own thing – to the detriment of all?
And, as she writes, the pervasive nature of modern NGOs could actually lead to a weakening of the state. The republic of NGOs begins to provide all the services that the state should be providing, ultimately serving to replace and undermine the public sector. Instead, we should be working to strengthen government services.
NGOs tend to follow their path or that of donors and this may result in possible overlapping and duplication of activities. In Haiti, for instance, following the January 12, 2010 earthquake that destroyed much of Port-au-Prince, concerns about the role of NGOs in the small island’s development have been raised. In the past, directing aid through NGOs has created dependency and contributed to limited government capacity, as well as weak institutions. Which, translated into simple words, means that Haitians look at NGOs rather than their government for basic public services.
Quite frankly, I too am trying to take a more critical look at my future involvement in the NGO sector. I like the idea of working with startups; on a personal level, they provide a fulfilling work experience with greater responsibility. But the last thing I want to do is continue to support the mushrooming of unnecessary NGOS and the weakening of the public sector. The last thing I want to do is replicate efforts without proper coordination. I think that NGOs, whether international or local, have to be intentional about 1) using their money well, and 2) striving to ultimately integrate with government-provided services. Here’s a great example of this I saw recently, by the International Legal Foundation, a non-profit that is striving to expand criminal defense services in post conflict countries. The ILF writes:
Although ILF-Afghanistan was built by an independent NGO funded by international donors, the ILF’s ultimate goal is to facilitate the creation of a government-supported, locally run public defender system. The agreement signed today represents a major step toward realizing this goal in Afghanistan. This model of institution building is common in other development sectors such as medicine; medical facilities are often established by NGOs with donor support before being turned over to the government. However, this type of arrangement is unique in the justice sector and may serve as an innovative example for other efforts to strengthen the rule of law in countries emerging from conflict or in transition.
Great initiative by the ILF — and I hope that more non-profits push for similar collaborations with governments. Another point I agree with is this:
I am convinced that many humanitarian workers are belonging to the “I-can-be-anywhere-and-I-don’t- care”-category of people, which are those who will conduct the same type of life no matter where they are. Goma, Nairobi, Ndjamena, Dadaab, Haiti, they will keep drinking beer under bomb attacks or post-tsunami affected areas without asking themselves a single question about why they are delivering tents and food to war refugees and IDPs. Many aid workers prefer meeting in fancy restaurants (always available in conflict zones) rather than reflecting on why they’re getting paid 3 or 4 times more their “local staff”. I’ve been told this is a psychological surviving strategy, a way to cope with suffering that people who are not used to it put in place. I don’t necessarily agree with this justification. I tend to blame the lack of curiosity and commitment of human beings. I also believe that many humanitarian workers go to underdeveloped countries, such are some in Africa, to try an exotic experience, to flee from their problems back home or to have living standards they will not be able to afford where they come from. Once they start, they love the money and find the lifestyle cool and fascinating, and they keep on rolling.
So many aid workers are employed by INGOs, the US government, USAID, and UN offices and while they have a relatively glamorous lifestyle, local people – including local aid workers and non-profit employees – are usually not given the same salary or perks. This truly frustrates me. While expats are going out to fancy restaurants and partying on weekends, “locals” (Note: I dislike this word too, but use it for lack of a better one) frequently are going without a meal. One Director of a local NGO told me she only eats out at a restaurant once a year. At the same time, I have seen expats going to restaurants several times a week and being paid more than three times the salary of local non-profit employees.
These are just a couple of things that are problematic with the international aid machinery, and I hope we can begin discussing these issues frankly and coming towards better solutions in the near future.
