This is a great article that I will share with my colleagues. It's so true - just send money (sounds crass, but true). I'm glad the message is getting out...that, and the message of long-term recovery (3-5 years) (rather than just relief assistance), engaging local capacity, and not displacing local resources.
My NGO convened a Disaster Recovery and Renewal workshop for community-based organizations that had been thru the Indian Ocean tsunami, the Pakistan earthquake, and the Gulf Coast Hurricanes (all occurring o/a 2005) about 1-year after the disasters. The stories of unnecessary aid were horrific. Winter coats to Indonesia?!? One arts therapy group based in NOLA received boxes sent from people who were essentially clearing out their garages (and getting a tax deduction), and the director had to figure out what to do with the old dog food bowls?!?! The group of orgs wrote a Manifesto -it was pretty cool. As were the roommate discussions of the NOLA pastor and the Pakistani NGO director!
Here are more links of interest: http://www.berkshireeagle.com/ci_14219261 http://www.standwithhaiti.org/haiti The media section is amazing. http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/haiti/v-fullstory/story/1429930.html
For disaster relief, I think it's very true. But I was so happy to see kids in Central America running around in SHOES, almost without exception (this would have been unheard of not many years back and makes a big health difference). These were all, or almost all, US-donated used flip-flops, crocs, and sandals. And *everyone* relied on the bundles of used clothes from the US--stores would have signs up announcing that they got a new box in. It's what most people wore.
Which maybe just underlines the regional differences. Those clothes bundles have been devastating to local economies in Africa, because brokers buy them up from packagers in the US, then resell them at huge markups, but still so cheaply (because, of course, the base price of the chain is free, since we foolish people donate them for nothing, thinking they go to people in need...) that they drive out of business all the local tailors, which in turn drives out of business all the weavers, which severely impacts the local farmers who provide the raw materials. :-(
Makes sense. And true in Central America for some things (but then as beautiful as traditional clothing is, it's a hell of a lot of work, and I don't weave MY own clothes either!), but for shoes the alternative is going barefoot. I'm sure there's a middleman and a mark-up somewhere in there in these cases too.
Also, having heard SO much about the corruption and graft in the NGOs (it's an unmonitored mess), I'm not thrilled about giving money either (that said, we donated money to Haiti). I wish there was a good solution.
It's true, it can be hard to find a perfect solution (given that we're dealing with humans). I like to think that the NGOs I contribute to are pretty responsible and corruption-free, but I know that sometimes it just comes down to who is "at the sharp end" (as they say in the military) and in some places those people are totally unreliable and just out to make out of it what they can. But NGOs are often a better solution than governmental foreign aid that gets handed over at the national level, which often doesn't even make it down to the local level to be stolen. Best of all I guess are programs where something tangible is sent that you know people need but that it won't really profit anyone to steal, like the program a couple of years ago that was providing school packs for kids in Iraq (the packs had paper, pencils, some other stuff useful to school kids but of no interest to the average black-marketeer).
While there is criticism of secondhand clothing eclipsing local textiles and tailoring, truthfully the demand is just not there for it. When I had clothes tailored in Africa, based on US catalog designs with local cloth (or from African wax prints imported from Holland), it was costly, and beyond local budgets. People would save tailoring for special occasions; people's daily wear was second hand clothing from the US and elsewhere. In India, I saw saris for US$1,000's.
True. Most people do not realize that their donated clothing is being resold several times at a profit by multiple middlemen. It is still more affordable, and it's in demand.
Shoes are a very good thing for all sorts of reasons. I'm glad the change is there in CA (as in Africa) and noticeable. It is a tangible, simple, low-cost, low-tech, high-impact difference.
I think materials/supplies donations (especially from individuals, especially in emergencies) cannot be absorbed effectively, and causes more problems than relief.
"Also, having heard SO much about the corruption and graft in the NGOs (it's an unmonitored mess)..." Seems a little sweeping. Many of the articles I've seen talk about how to weed out the reputable ones (and there are SO many) from the opportunistic ones. This is why charity navigator exists, among other guides. Working for an NGO/nonprofit, I’m fascinated by the many misconceptions about them. I do know there is no such thing as a quick, easy, cheap fix.
Here’s another good link: http://informationincontext.typepad.com/good_intentions_are_not_e/2010/01/the-dos-and-donts-of-disaster-donations.html#more
Obviously, I'm pretty passionate about this – and should probably go post on my own blog…:-)
On a roll... When I was in Tamil Nadu, India about a year post-tsunami, it was incredible to see the rebuilt houses from relief assistance. However, different aid orgs had rebuilt in different communities/villages. While built with mostly local materials, and culturally/contextually appropriate, they were identical within the community (sorta pre-fab housing), while having great disparities between/among the communities. Oxfam houses were different/better/worse than Aga Khan houses than UN houses....caused some crazy inequities and inter-community discord. Makes my head whirl and fall off....
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 07:50 pm (UTC)My NGO convened a Disaster Recovery and Renewal workshop for community-based organizations that had been thru the Indian Ocean tsunami, the Pakistan earthquake, and the Gulf Coast Hurricanes (all occurring o/a 2005) about 1-year after the disasters. The stories of unnecessary aid were horrific. Winter coats to Indonesia?!? One arts therapy group based in NOLA received boxes sent from people who were essentially clearing out their garages (and getting a tax deduction), and the director had to figure out what to do with the old dog food bowls?!?! The group of orgs wrote a Manifesto -it was pretty cool. As were the roommate discussions of the NOLA pastor and the Pakistani NGO director!
Here are more links of interest:
http://www.berkshireeagle.com/ci_14219261
http://www.standwithhaiti.org/haiti The media section is amazing.
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/haiti/v-fullstory/story/1429930.html
no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 08:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 09:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 09:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 09:47 pm (UTC)Also, having heard SO much about the corruption and graft in the NGOs (it's an unmonitored mess), I'm not thrilled about giving money either (that said, we donated money to Haiti). I wish there was a good solution.
no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 10:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 10:51 pm (UTC)True. Most people do not realize that their donated clothing is being resold several times at a profit by multiple middlemen. It is still more affordable, and it's in demand.
Shoes are a very good thing for all sorts of reasons. I'm glad the change is there in CA (as in Africa) and noticeable. It is a tangible, simple, low-cost, low-tech, high-impact difference.
I think materials/supplies donations (especially from individuals, especially in emergencies) cannot be absorbed effectively, and causes more problems than relief.
"Also, having heard SO much about the corruption and graft in the NGOs (it's an unmonitored mess)..."
Seems a little sweeping. Many of the articles I've seen talk about how to weed out the reputable ones (and there are SO many) from the opportunistic ones. This is why charity navigator exists, among other guides. Working for an NGO/nonprofit, I’m fascinated by the many misconceptions about them. I do know there is no such thing as a quick, easy, cheap fix.
Here’s another good link:
http://informationincontext.typepad.com/good_intentions_are_not_e/2010/01/the-dos-and-donts-of-disaster-donations.html#more
Obviously, I'm pretty passionate about this – and should probably go post on my own blog…:-)
no subject
Date: 2010-01-21 11:00 pm (UTC)When I was in Tamil Nadu, India about a year post-tsunami, it was incredible to see the rebuilt houses from relief assistance. However, different aid orgs had rebuilt in different communities/villages. While built with mostly local materials, and culturally/contextually appropriate, they were identical within the community (sorta pre-fab housing), while having great disparities between/among the communities. Oxfam houses were different/better/worse than Aga Khan houses than UN houses....caused some crazy inequities and inter-community discord.
Makes my head whirl and fall off....