 |
| Cleaning the mess in the aid industry is critical Picture source: winningprogressive.org |
Let
me start with my own recent experience. I opened my letter box upon returning
home after a day’s hectic activities on December 2012. One of the two letters I
received was from Save the Children, a leading non-governmental organization
seeking lasting change in the lives of children based in the UK. I entered my apartment to see
what the surprise is this time. And indeed I was surprised. A stereotypical starving-looking
face of a child incontestably of African origin lied on top of the package in
the envelope to solicit for financial support. Why this picture? I repeatedly asked
myself. I wasn't too surprised either. The use of images is so common a
strategy for several international organizations and NGOs to raise money for projects
and programmes in developing countries. I was rather surprised this approach of
getting aid to help the poor has taken a door-to-door, house-to-house form.
This
approach described above – showing ‘damaging’ images and videos of hungry-looking,
poverty-stricken people to court public
sympathy for increased donations – is nothing new. It has existed for
centuries in the aid industry. Pictures of people ravaged by war, poverty,
hunger and diseases have found their way into websites, reports and campaigns
of international organizations and NGOs that are into development and poverty
reduction.
The
recent survey by UK-based Charity Oxfam on the perception of Africa only justifies
the degree of damage that has been caused so far. In a randomized selection of 2009
people, according the Oxfam, almost half (47%) of the people identified hunger.
The survey suggests over-exposure to negative
media and advertising portrayals of Africa and developing countries in other
parts of the world may be contributing to this sense of disempowerment.
Respondents described this portrayal as ‘depressing, manipulative and hopeless’,
with 43% of respondents saying it made them feel that conditions for people
living in the developing world would never improve.[1] In another poll by
Oxfam this time online, over half (55%) of 1295 respondents mentioned issues
relating to “hunger”, “famine” and “poverty”, when they were asked “the first things that come to mind when you think of
Africa”.
The
causative is missing
These
findings are of course behind Oxfam’s new campaign – with the mantra “Let’s
make Africa famous for its stunning countryside, not hunger” – to display images
of landscapes and waterfalls in Africa across newspapers, outdoor and digital
media. These perceptions developed largely as a result of exposure to despicable
images and documentaries are not limited to the UK only but have turned a
phenomenon in several developed countries. What has been the nature of this? I tend
to bring to the fore the reality that is neatly misinterpreted not only by Oxfam
but several other international organizations, NGOs and philanthropic agencies
seeking to improve the lots of the poor in Africa. The issue at hand largely goes
beyond what Oxfam has started doing. Surprisingly missing in the discourse is
the cause of this act. What contributes to the spread of these images? Who
contributes to spreading these images and for what purposes?
For
the past decade, the aid industry has seen incessant proliferations of images
portraying hunger and poverty from the digital media to the print media. It is today
part of the social media. These stereotyping images depicting helplessness have
increased for three main reasons. First, images of poverty and hunger have been
used to court the sympathy of the public to donate. Second, these images have
been adopted as evidence to prove to donors that their monies are being put to
good use. Lastly, the growing challenges and threats of poverty and hunger
across developing countries especially those in Africa have inspired different and
sometimes harsh measures to solve and reverse the gloomy trend.
The
question is that have these images and videos been capable of getting the
sympathies of the public, international organizations and philanthropists to contribute.
Yes, they have worked in raising huge funds but with remarkably negative
implications. Oxfam’s surveys have uncovered have one element of the implications.
There
are more questions than answers. There is a question of contradiction. The rhetoric
of this campaign to dignify “damaging” images contrasts sharply with the sobering
reality. It is a fact that several reputable international organizations and
non-governmental organizations have engaged in the use of images that portrays
hunger and poverty as part of their fundraising campaigns. Oxfam, I can throw
this challenge, cannot absolve itself of this act. It’s now commonplace. This
narrative portrays another stark mess that has characterized the aid industry. Organizations
today work with these images and videos, so a counter-campaign to refocus on images
of Africa’s countryside is at best contradictory. These stereotype images
unfortunately define the modus operandi of aid organizations and donors today.
Again,
is there not a question of morality? With the growing knowledge, awareness and
openness of the direction of global development, governance and cooperation,
there are very serious moral and ethical questions if donors still need images
and videos to get convinced to contribute to development of the poor or an
economy. For me, the decision to hold on to the supposedly Western belief of
helping the poor should have nothing to do with “damaging” images and videos.
Allure of Oxfam’s
Campaign
The
campaign by Oxfam to reverse this trend is a good start but dangerously simplistic
and misleading. I doubt this quick-fix campaign to be the solution to reverse
this old pattern that has crept into aid industry. Oxfam’s campaign approach
rather confuses the causes and effects. While it focuses on the effects, it is
dead silent on what causes the use of these images and documentaries and those
behind. There have been implications. We have the ‘aid fatigue syndrome’ at
hand. Unless of course the argument is that of Dambisa Moyo’s “Dead Aid” (that
aid is not working), this syndrome should be a cause of worry. The public is tired
of making donations not driven by their own knowledge to expand the prospects
of development but an image or a video of poor and hungry-looking people. As
Oxfam’s survey suggests, “three out of five of
those polled said they were or had become desensitised to images depicting
issues such as hunger, drought and disease and almost 1 in 4 (23%) admitted
they turned away when confronted by such images.” The damage has been
done. Is this campaign the right solution? Absolutely not!
If this habit of showing images of and video documentaries on
poverty, hunger, diseases and drought persists, one can easily predict
irreversible destruction of the aid industry. Perversely, this poses a
challenge to the agenda of aid effectiveness. Continuous exposure to images means
one thing; that aid money is not achieving its intended purpose. The right call
should be a complete change of tack. There should rather be a massive and
radical clean-up of the aid industry. This architecture of aid premised on “images”
needs urgent rethinking. This campaign style must stop! Oxfam, to say the least,
is at fault. This is why in my opinion their campaign is prima facie a faux pas and contradictory. The campaign is a gravely
misinformed. The solution is never the sheer lamentation or quick fix image-restoring
campaign of Oxfam. The mechanisms of raising funds should change.
Nonetheless let me hasten to add that I am not in any way downplaying
the contributions Oxfam is making in enhancing livelihoods in developing
countries. They are up to task and incredibly achieving results in their
humanitarian activities. But the time has come for a sweeping change. It is now
or never!
And to those with somewhat prejudiced perceptions and misinformed
judgments of the state of Africa because of pictures and videos of mostly “exaggerated”
hopelessness, they can continue live in that state of distasteful ignorance. Those
bent on generalizing an image or video to mean the condition of Africa can
continue to live in their own yet-to-be-discovered planet. They might be
missing out. Africa two decades ago is different from Africa today. Progress
has been made and is continuing unabatedly regardless of the challenges we see
now. I am optimistic of a change possible to make far-reaching human development
and economic growth happen in Africa.
I end with a quote of reasoning from the two renowned MIT
economists, Esther Duflo and Abhijit Banerjee in their book “Poor Economics: A radical rethinking of the
way to fight global poverty”, “To
progress, we have to abandon the habit of reducing the poor to cartoon
characters and take time to really understand their lives, in all their
complexity and richness”.
This
article marks the start of a campaign dubbed “Cleaning the mess in the aid industry” that will be happen right
here on this blog “Rethinking Poverty
and Development”, “The harsh truth and revealing reality of global development
and governance”.
BY: Stephen Yeboah [profstephenyeboah@gmail.com]
[1] Oxfam Press Release (December
28, 2012), “Show Africa’s potential not just its problems”. http://www.oxfam.org.uk/media-centre/press-releases/2012/12/show-africas-potential-not-just-its-problems-says-oxfam
(Accessed January 11, 2013)
No comments:
Post a Comment