Has the NGO model for international aid and development failed?
If you’ve read any of my previous posts on failed development models in Africa, then you would know that my immediate and emphatic response to that question is: YES. (Note that there are definitely some exceptions depending on the exact nature of the NGO, but in general I have major issues with donor-funded and thus donor-driven projects and organizations.)
But recently, a friend of mine confronted me on this answer. He spent two years working with the Clinton Foundation in the Dominican Republic, and we share many opinions on aid and development work. Yet he asked me to take another look at that question, but from a different perspective.
My perspective is that the majority of NGOs in Africa are doing more harm than good by being donor-dependent and by giving things away for free. I could go on for quite a while on this issue, but that’s not the point of this post.
The point is that there is another perspective. The NGOs’ perspective. I forgot about this.
What if the NGOs’ primary goal is to create jobs (mostly for ex-pats)? And to allow development workers to feel good about themselves by giving back to the global community? And to provide ex-pats with a comfortable lifestyle outside of their home countries? And to create a dependency on aid so that their organization’s necessity and sustainability is assured? Because in that case, the NGO model hasn’t failed at all. Rather it’s quite successful.
But I guess it all depends on whose perspective we take.
(Photo: one of my favorite works of art by my favorite artist, taken from here)
September 24, 2010 at 4:45 am
Hey,
So I am pretty biased on this one, seeing as I’m an NGO worker actually believing I’m doing some good. But I’ll pitch in my 2 cents anyway.
Even if you take the assumption that NGO’s are actively doing harm, and the only benefits are to the NGO’s themselves and the employees, I believe there is still a huge benefit to general population of the host country. Rarely does an NGO have more than a handful of ex-pats. The vast majority of any NGO is local staff, who can benefit immensely from NGO salaries, training programs, and the opportunities to learn to learn from other top caliber people (both local and expat) that are also employed by the NGO. Almost all private sector success stories I have heard, have piggy-backed on NGO work or experience gained in an NGO environment. Moreover, most NGOs don’t have any expats working for them, period. They are local organizations working on issues they care about and don’t come with a big paycheck or NGO car.
In any case, I find it pretty difficult to believe that an NGO’s primary goal is providing employment for expats looking to live it large in developing countries.
Why don’t you take yet another step back and look at donor agencies? If your problem is donor-funded and donor-driven agencies why can’t we hold the donors to higher standards to educate themselves and be responsible and support the kind of programs that are sustainable? check out the good intentions are not enough blog at http://www.goodintents.org
September 24, 2010 at 8:38 am
hey ashley!
first off, thanks for your comment! and second, i agree with you that you are an NGO worker actually doing some good.
i also agree with you that most NGOs employ a number of locals, and that there are many benefits to these employees (experience, opportunities, etc). my question though is what percentage of the salaried staff (or well paid staff even) are locals? a number of smaller NGOs i’ve seen have a large local staff, but any larger NGO moving large amounts of cash seems to be dependent on ex-pat staff members for all their higher up positions. or this is what i observed in a number of countries, at least… but i could be wrong because i have no statistics.
and i have yet to find an NGO without any ex-pat staff, but they could be out there. the organizations i have found run entirely by locals are always community-based organizations (CBOs) rather than NGOs.
also, maybe an NGO’s primary goal isn’t to provide employment for ex-pats in developing countries, but it still seems to be a pretty big part of their model to me. regardless of whether or not it was their intention.
taking another step back and looking at donor agencies is definitely crucial, and the good intentions are not enough blog is great.
September 26, 2010 at 4:36 am
I’m keen to hear your view of EWB in this context. I wrote a post directly related to the movement towards hiring more local staff and fewer Canadians and what that could mean for EWB. It’s here: http://www.bfotg.com/?p=66
Cheers,
-tess
September 29, 2010 at 12:46 am
cool. just commented on your post.
in summary, i think the movement towards hiring more local staff is a good one. but i also think that cultural exchange plays a pretty big role in all of this, and probably is crucial in creating the leaders needed to eventually facilite the transfer of any projects from foreigners to locals. so i guess there’s a balance to strike, as in all things.
October 12, 2010 at 9:34 pm
quoted on a friends blog with a follow-up to this post: http://www.whereintheworldiscolleen.com/archives/1319