Over the years, several humanitarian agencies and
non-government organizations have been visiting and working in Ghana with the
primary but gargantuan aim of alleviating poverty among the rural poor and
vulnerable, especially women. For instance, CARE started operations in Ghana in
1994 and has since expanded to Togo and Benin. I find it interesting that their projects are funded through partnerships with
local and civil organizations (care.org) who donate so much money, yet there is little
evidence to support what the funds were used for. Of course, a one-off
intervention (mostly food) passed through some ‘gate-keepers’ (who keep a lion’s
share for themselves) cannot defeat poverty and achieve social justice as is
boldly written on their website. A search on the revenue CARE generated through
contributions and grants in 2018 revealed an amount of $602,938,894 (care.org). It is no wonder that Trauger and Fluri (2019)
refer to humanitarian and development agencies as being in the “business of
international development.” A business in which facilitators, development
workers, and other business owners enrich themselves to the disadvantage of the
intended recipients.
Another international humanitarian agency working in Ghana is Global communities: Partners for good. Information on their website indicates they prioritize rural development. Yet, most of the ‘success’ stories they have on their website (globalcommunities.org) are USAID and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded programs that they supported to implement. Most of these over-hyped projects are in Accra, Ghana’s capital city, and not among the rural ‘poor.’
Humanitarian and international development agencies hire celebrities to advocate and advertise their programs for fundraising purposes. These celebrities are seen lauding these agencies’ activities and praising them for improving the lots of vulnerable people in society through mainstream media outlets. However, they (celebrities) are rarely seen discussing the root cause and driving force behind gender, sexuality, class, race, status, and other forms of inequality that exist within various geographical locations.
As Trauger and Fluri (2019) justifiably observed, the CARE Ghana and Global communities’ websites are splashed with women and children who are posed as the most vulnerable and poor and used to persuade philanthropists and donors to continue funding projects that deepen inequality and aggravate the situation of these people. I repeat the question posed by Truager and Fluri (2019) here: If celebrities, wealthy philanthropists, government, and non-governmental organizations give and generate funds towards poverty alleviation, why do poverty and economic inequality persist?
Is it an issue about the approach adopted by these agencies in their aid provision, or is it just one of the adverse effects of capitalism?
References
Trauger, A., & Fluri, J. L. (2019). Engendering development:
capitalism and inequality in the global economy. Routledge.
Thank you Faith for your lovely piece. I completely agree with you. Humanitarian work is no longer a selfless venture but rather an opportunistic channel that some of our current leaders are using to enrich themselves, so often you hear that millions of dollars have been donated from international institutions with the agenda to help women's reproduction health at a particular hospital. Yet when you go observe that hospital months later, you realise that little to no improvement has taken place. It is a rather sad reality that most of the people who are put incharge of the resources for the communities consume majority of those resources and have now turned it into a competition of who can acquire more through foreign agencies.
ReplyDeleteI honestly think it may be both the approach adopted by the agencies in their aid provision and the adverse effects of capitalism because it is those with power and money who are put in those positions as gate-keepers, so we need to put checks and balances in place where those authorities would be held accountable for what they have received from foreign aid. Otherwise this vicious cycle will continue and the goal of poverty ever being eradicated will just be a mere written goal.
Faith, you raise very insightful arguments. Humanitarian interventions in Ghana and in most part of Africa have been a failure if I am right to say. Most communities that become targets of such interventions remain deplorable and the people within the communities, especially the women and children suffer from the repercussions of such interventions. Often, the people in charge of the interventions only sit within the comforts of their offices and homes to give directives. Yet they receive huge sums of money as wages and salaries for their work. Just as Trauger and Fluri (2019) put, development interventions have become the breeding nest for most Multinational corporations, and their agents. They do not seek indigenous knowledge and even when they do, it is not put to use. Talk of the Media as well as celebrities, all these bodies one way or the other work with capitalist intents. Their goal is to maximize profit and the only way to do that is be in alliance with the Superpowers and those who control chunk of the resources. It is more like these bodies act on the concept of “false generosity” such that they would want to see the poor always at the mercy of the Rich. Until such approaches are abandoned and agents of development and humanitarian interventions start embracing indigenous knowledge and move away from such capitalist ideologies, which is quite impossible, much would not be achieved in terms of making a positive change in the lives of the less privileged in our communities.
ReplyDelete