Development work is people work. And people are fallible. Even if they have the best intentions. This applies to the giving side, but also to the receiving side. Even in the most optimal situations, no matter what you sow, your yield will never be 100%. Nor can you expect immediate and absolute results from development work. Usually it involves a complex interplay of factors. Our expectations are set too high: if we do something good, it must produce something good, and quickly. But are we really that fast ourselves? Unfortunately we are more likely to be late. Prevention doesn’t sell.
Criticism
To start with the bad news: Why does development work not always have the desired effect? What is the criticism? Where are we going wrong?
- Development organizations would in fact be self-sustaining.
- Western organizations do not work efficiently enough.
- We dump our outdated medications without knowing if they are necessary and without wondering if they might be harmful.
- We send high-calorie food that makes people sick because they are not used to it.
- During mass actions we flood the local market with an avalanche of relief goods. In the longer term, the effect is disruptive and even devastating, as we push local producers out of the market.
Cured
Development cooperation and humanitarian aid based on idealism will not last. Taking into account all the problems and criticisms, it is realistic not to expect to do good in poor countries (no matter how much we want to do so and feel good about it), but to strive to do as little harm as possible. So let’s not go for quick effects and inform ourselves well. Because people in much less fortunate circumstances have the same rights as us. That is why it would be good to start providing assistance much earlier. After all, prevention is better than cure.
Corruption
When else is aid counterproductive? What can go wrong on the receiving end?
- Local warlords and the local government pocket part of the aid money.
- The aid is manipulated by local rulers to fight out their conflicts.
- You may, unintentionally/unnoticed, be helping enemy militias, allowing them to continue their violent actions.
Complicit
Critics believe that the Netherlands should consider ceasing emergency aid in conflict areas with corrupt governments if a thorough evaluation shows that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. Yet providing aid makes aid organizations complicit in continuing the civil war, because aid gives the country’s leaders an alibi for not caring for the well-being of their people. Aid organizations such as the Red Cross do not believe the argument is valid.
Amoral
The reasoning would be correct if wars would stop in areas where aid organizations cannot reach. Those areas exist. Yet the war does not stop there. This accusation is therefore bizarre, says director Tineke Ceelen of the Refugee Foundation: We do not legitimize regimes. We don’t end wars. We save people’s lives. It is unprovable and amoral to assume that if we were to withdraw, the warring parties would suddenly care about their own population. If we withdraw, we are gambling with human lives. We are not a casino!
Development aid
Development aid ultimately benefits ourselves as well. Aid organizations could demonstrate this based on the results of studies and aid. Because results are certainly there, but they are usually only visible in the longer term. In addition, it is essential that the Dutch government and the international community work together to ensure that humanitarian aid is protected so that it reaches its destination. This means that they impose punitive measures on governments or armed forces if they misuse the aid for their own gain. Because we, however small we are, play a significant role internationally in this area, we can certainly make those demands.
Anticipate
The people in need of help themselves cannot do anything about it if the help does not turn out well. It’s bad enough that they are entirely dependent on the goodwill and competence of others and suffer from corruption and power-hungry governments. However, that should not be a reason to halve or even stop aid altogether. On the contrary, our job is to go much further and anticipate the problems.
Humanitarian help
Development cooperation and humanitarian aid are an integral part of the Netherlands’ foreign policy and of international cooperation. After WWII, we benefited greatly from US aid (the Marshall Plan) to rebuild our country and our economy. Since then, we have been on the prosperous side and it is our turn to help those in need. Even in times of crisis, we are not in such bad shape that we have to survive on one euro (or dollar) a day.
Humanity
We still have enormous resources and we owe it to our class to ensure that others enjoy at least a decent standard of living. Of course, there will always be people who like to abdicate their responsibility and do not want to be convinced of the duty, necessity and humanity to combat poverty . And they are right, we must do everything we can to prevent poverty and hunger.
Bow
With a campaign like Giro 555, only slightly more than 20 percent of the 800,000 euros is spent on medicines and nutritional supplements. It is therefore rarely medicines and nutritional supplements that are expensive; around 55 euros per malnourished child. What counts is the cost of essential medical personnel. What makes aid so expensive in South Sudan, for example, is the flying in of goods and expert personnel. This poses enormous challenges for the collaborating aid organizations. There is no inefficient use of the donations. Nothing gets stuck on the bow. Without staff, there is no point in handing out medicines, says Tineke Ceelen. Put someone with a chronic illness in a hospital with a box of medicine and it is of no use to him, even in the Netherlands.
Local
The Red Cross confirms this. Of course you want to provide help as cheaply as possible, Merlijn Stoffels explains. Buy locally, transport by road. But what if there is nothing locally? And roads are impassable? And unsafe? Then you can’t let people down, can you? Then hundreds of thousands of people will die.
Prevent
Another issue is that collections such as those for starving Africa usually come too late. Prevention is more effective and cheaper. For example, if there is a drought, such as in Somalia, you need to provide drought-resistant seeds. Persuading residents to exchange their goats for camels that are more resistant to drought. By doing so you make yourself redundant. But it is difficult to raise funds for this; Convincing people to give money is difficult when there has not yet been a disaster. But development work is a long-term matter.