The Listening Project began as an attempt to capture the side of international developmental aid that we don’t often get to hear. It’s conductors, Mary B. Anderson, Dayna Brown and Isabella Jean, wanted to collect the experiences of those who receive aid, so as to better outline their expectations and understand their realities.
The project’s main objective is to highlight the importance of critical feedback from those whose lives it affects most deeply. They discovered that there was an overwhelmingly popular opinion among the 6,000 people interviewed that the notion of aid is good, but its implementation is increasingly bad.
They found that those receiving international assistance generally held expectations that it would contribute not only to the economic betterment of their country but also to its increased political and social conditions. Ultimately, they hoped that the support they received would garner a relationship with the international community based on solidarity.
Almost every interview began along the lines of: “We very much appreciate the assistance… but…” The “but” was nearly always followed by a personal example of a negative externality produced by their country’s growing dependence on foreign aid. The interviewees agreed that their reality does not meet their expectations. While the stories concerning aid were all very cheerful in the short-term, they grew to be disheartening in the long-term.
The chief negative effect identified in the interviews typically involved an increase in the general sentiment of powerlessness and dependency. Those interviewed said that, at times, international actors bring projects that wind up perpetuating the need for more projects and more assistance. Additionally, the influx of public funds often leads actors within the country to create policies and projects that assume these funds will always be available. These practices establish an endless cycle of dependency.
Interviewees also noted how aid can increase tension between groups. Often this is brought on by a sense of relative deprivation caused by specific targeting of aid of one group and not of another. Because foreign agencies sometimes assign aid along ethnic or religious lines- divisions that may have caused violent conflict in the past- there runs a danger of reigniting long-standing prejudices.
Finally, interviewees say that the solidarity they hoped would come from aid has instead lead to a sense of mistrust toward aid agencies. The main suggestion of a great number of those interviewed was that there should be an increase in consultation. Aid agencies need to observe more closely the local social dynamics that play out in different cultural contexts before administering to the people.
On a more uplifting note, many observed an increasingly positive impact on the status of women. Many international programs focus on the improvement of the lives of women, and a great number have been successful at helping women become empowered. These programs often serve two purposes: to increase the capabilities of women and to force men to realize how this increase can contribute to the betterment of their community as a whole.
Before the project, the researchers wanted to emphasize that they in no way disagreed with the potential foreign assistance holds to bring positive impacts to the billions of people living in poverty worldwide. Their take on the issues of aid revolves around problems of implementation, not motivation.
They state in their book Time to Listen: Hearing People on the Receiving End of International Aid that the main problems stem from the historical focus on disaster response instead of prevention. They suggest that a proactive approach to humanitarian issues is the most helpful in the long-term. They also cite certain aid agencies’ adoption of business principles and mechanisms as a prevalent issue. Aid agencies sometimes adhere too closely to the interests of their profit-seeking donors while failing to respond appropriately to the needs of aid recipients.
Additionally, when local partners are used as “middle men,” it creates a wider disconnect between donor and recipient. This can provide an opportunity for the diversion of funds and most certainly breeds “competition instead of collaboration.”
The Listening Project aims to bring these contradictions between expectations and realities to light. Since its beginnings in 2005, the project has influenced multiple aid agencies to adopt policies that can better address the issues raised by the aid recipients. As the voices of these people are heard, the awareness of the need for changes in the way foreign assistance is provided also increases.
– Kathryn Cassibry
Source: The Listening Project
Photo: Global Humanitarian Assistance
The History of UNICEF
UNICEF is one of the biggest names in international aid and humanitarian work in the world today. It has won the Nobel Prize, the first to be awarded to an organization, and not an individual, as well as the Prince of Asturias award. Despite being highly active in fundraising, awareness, relief work and research, very few people know the origins of the organization.
Founded in 1946, UNICEF began with the specific mission of providing emergency food and healthcare to children in the countries that had been destroyed by World War II. Its original name was United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund. It was later changed to the United Nation’s Children Fund after being officially adopted as a permanent branch of the UN in 1954.
Though its headquarters are in New York City, it operates in over 190 countries, focusing on the welfare of children in at-risk areas. Since 2006, the organization has concentrated on a few specific areas: child survival and development, basic education and gender equality, mitigating the effects of HIV/AIDS on children, child protection and policy advocacy, and partnerships. UNICEF has been a key player in global development work since its inception. UNICEF operates during emergencies in addition to supporting developing countries to provide children with basic resources and advocate for children’s rights.
UNICEF has significant star power, utilizing celebrities to raise awareness, thus making it a strong cultural force as well. Ambassadors for the organization have included Audrey Hepburn, Queen Rania of Jordan, Richard Attenborough, David Beckham, Jackie Chan, and many others. In 2006, the major football team FC Barcelona sponsored UNICEF, and wears the organization’s name and logo emblazoned on their shirts (a reversal in the usual sponsorship practices for football teams).
It has recently drawn criticism for its stance on international adoption. It came under fire when it was noted that during major disasters, it discouraged adoption agencies from allowing international adoption, offering incentives to keep children in their own countries. Many saw this as a short-sighted policy, which prompted UNICEF to issue a press release, stating: “The case of children separated from their families and communities during war or natural disasters merits special mention. Family tracing should be the first priority and inter-country adoption should only be envisaged for a child once these tracing efforts have proved fruitless, and stable in-country solutions are not available.”
UNICEF has repeatedly shown itself to be the highly influential and one of the most effective operations working towards protecting the rights of children worldwide.
– Farahnaz Mohammed
Source: UNICEF
Photo: UNICEF
Tuberculosis Info
Tuberculosis may be the world’s most romanticized disease. La Boheme’s Mimi, Les Miserables’ Fantine, Moulin Rouge’s Satine, among many others, have succumbed to the disease. Despite being a recurring theme in literature and art, the reality of tuberculosis is much uglier.
Tuberculosis, or TB for short, is second only to HIV/AIDS as the leading cause of death from a single infection. It’s symptoms including coughing up sputum or blood, fever, night sweats, weakness and chest pain.
An infection of the lungs, TB is quite insidious. Highly contagious, it can be spread simply by inhaling a few particles from an infected person coughing, spitting or sneezing. It can lie dormant in many individuals, meaning that although they are carriers, they don’t develop the active disease, nor do they transmit it.
However, once infected with the active form of the disease, the symptoms are often mild and so individuals do not immediately seek treatment and often contribute to spreading the infection. People infected with HIV or diabetes are much more likely to get TB because of weakened immune systems. Environmental risk factors including overcrowding and malnutrition make TB a disease of the poor.
TB occurs in almost every country in the world, though mostly in Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa. Both treatable and curable, control of the disease is mainly preventative, done through vaccination. Once contracted, antibiotics can be administered to help those infected, though treatment is often difficult because of the resistant nature of the bacteria.
– Farahnaz Mohammed
Source: WHO
Photo: Los Angeles Times
The Listening Project
The Listening Project began as an attempt to capture the side of international developmental aid that we don’t often get to hear. It’s conductors, Mary B. Anderson, Dayna Brown and Isabella Jean, wanted to collect the experiences of those who receive aid, so as to better outline their expectations and understand their realities.
The project’s main objective is to highlight the importance of critical feedback from those whose lives it affects most deeply. They discovered that there was an overwhelmingly popular opinion among the 6,000 people interviewed that the notion of aid is good, but its implementation is increasingly bad.
They found that those receiving international assistance generally held expectations that it would contribute not only to the economic betterment of their country but also to its increased political and social conditions. Ultimately, they hoped that the support they received would garner a relationship with the international community based on solidarity.
Almost every interview began along the lines of: “We very much appreciate the assistance… but…” The “but” was nearly always followed by a personal example of a negative externality produced by their country’s growing dependence on foreign aid. The interviewees agreed that their reality does not meet their expectations. While the stories concerning aid were all very cheerful in the short-term, they grew to be disheartening in the long-term.
The chief negative effect identified in the interviews typically involved an increase in the general sentiment of powerlessness and dependency. Those interviewed said that, at times, international actors bring projects that wind up perpetuating the need for more projects and more assistance. Additionally, the influx of public funds often leads actors within the country to create policies and projects that assume these funds will always be available. These practices establish an endless cycle of dependency.
Interviewees also noted how aid can increase tension between groups. Often this is brought on by a sense of relative deprivation caused by specific targeting of aid of one group and not of another. Because foreign agencies sometimes assign aid along ethnic or religious lines- divisions that may have caused violent conflict in the past- there runs a danger of reigniting long-standing prejudices.
Finally, interviewees say that the solidarity they hoped would come from aid has instead lead to a sense of mistrust toward aid agencies. The main suggestion of a great number of those interviewed was that there should be an increase in consultation. Aid agencies need to observe more closely the local social dynamics that play out in different cultural contexts before administering to the people.
On a more uplifting note, many observed an increasingly positive impact on the status of women. Many international programs focus on the improvement of the lives of women, and a great number have been successful at helping women become empowered. These programs often serve two purposes: to increase the capabilities of women and to force men to realize how this increase can contribute to the betterment of their community as a whole.
Before the project, the researchers wanted to emphasize that they in no way disagreed with the potential foreign assistance holds to bring positive impacts to the billions of people living in poverty worldwide. Their take on the issues of aid revolves around problems of implementation, not motivation.
They state in their book Time to Listen: Hearing People on the Receiving End of International Aid that the main problems stem from the historical focus on disaster response instead of prevention. They suggest that a proactive approach to humanitarian issues is the most helpful in the long-term. They also cite certain aid agencies’ adoption of business principles and mechanisms as a prevalent issue. Aid agencies sometimes adhere too closely to the interests of their profit-seeking donors while failing to respond appropriately to the needs of aid recipients.
Additionally, when local partners are used as “middle men,” it creates a wider disconnect between donor and recipient. This can provide an opportunity for the diversion of funds and most certainly breeds “competition instead of collaboration.”
The Listening Project aims to bring these contradictions between expectations and realities to light. Since its beginnings in 2005, the project has influenced multiple aid agencies to adopt policies that can better address the issues raised by the aid recipients. As the voices of these people are heard, the awareness of the need for changes in the way foreign assistance is provided also increases.
– Kathryn Cassibry
Source: The Listening Project
Photo: Global Humanitarian Assistance
Pact: Building Local Promise
Pact is a United States based non-governmental organization (NGO) that focuses on developing communities in regions of the world plagued by health crises, resource dependence, and extreme poverty. Its unique operating procedure partners donors with local communities in such regions as Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, and sub-Saharan Africa. Pact was founded in 1971 to oversee the distribution of small-scale USAID grants to development assistance organizations.
Pact’s three core values of (a) local solutions, (b) partnerships, and (c) results, put people at the center of their approach. With over 10,000 local partners, Pact customizes its system for every community. For example, Pact leads a development project in Ethiopia funded by USAID. It involves local and federal governments, NGOs, and nonprofits to provide health treatment and formal education for nearly 50,000 kids and adults.
The NGOs focus on local solutions, allowing vulnerable populations to take responsibility for the aid they will receive. Capacity development is highly prioritized in the regions served by Pact; local governments are developed, infrastructure is improved, and effective governance systems are formed.
Partners with Pact, small and large organizations alike, are also assured of progress with tangible success. The organization publishes a yearly report, called “Measuring Pact’s Mission,” where six different impact areas are examined. These impact areas include health, livelihood, natural resource management, and state-society engagement.
While accountability and effectiveness are frequent concerns of NGOs, Pact is the first USAID partner to publish its program data to the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI). IATI aims to provide information about NGO spending and its measurable results. While the Initiative is relatively new – the first annual report of IATI was published at the end of April 2013 – it promises a clear picture of where aid money goes.
Pact works in more than 25 countries worldwide, and its program services are incredibly diverse. These programs include formal schooling for children in several African nations, the improvement of health care for HIV/AIDS patients in the Ukraine, and the responsible micro-financing of productive enterprises in Myanmar. Pact’s holistic view of global development and its commitment to aid transparency make the organization a prime example for other development-focused NGOs.
– Naomi Doraisamy
Sources: Pact, International Aid Transparency Initiative
Photo: Pact Facebook
Google Blimps Bring Internet To Africa
Some companies provide food to people in countries who need it, others may donate supplies to build homes or schools, and some may send doctors or medical supplies to help the sick. Google is taking a different approach, using their technology skills to bring the internet to Africa via blimps.
The company’s goal is to connect nearly 1 billion people across Africa and Asia to the internet with high-flying blimps and balloons. The Google blimps are beneficial because they can cover a wider area while remaining cost-efficient. Google has created an ecosystem of smartphones that are low-cost with low processing power, and the signals are carried by the balloons. Google also is asking the local government regulators for permission to use television airwaves for their project, because these waves are better at transferring signals through buildings and across large areas of land than traditional WiFi infrastructure.
Google isn’t the first to propose a plan that uses balloons and blimps. Afghanistan already uses blimp technology for surveillance purposes by scanning wide areas that wouldn’t be possible or as simple as other forms of ground technology. The U.S. military is also involved in cloud-type projects involving blimps, and the Army uses them for communication. Instead of using traditional satellites to communicate back and forth with troops on the ground, which is very expensive, they use Combat SkySat balloons.
Google has begun a trial launch of their blimps in South African schools to test how well the new technology performs.
– Katie Brockman
Source Forbes, Wired
The Evolution of the Millennium Development Goals
With the deadline for the Millennium Development Goals set at the end of this year, the final results will be mixed. Some targets have been met, while others have fallen short. Regardless, having the development goals in place has undoubtedly led to tangible progress on all fronts.
A U.N. panel, co-chaired by British prime minister David Cameron and the presidents of Indonesia and Liberia, last week released a report outlining a set of new goals with a target of the year 2030. These goals are based on the original Millennium Development Goals, and are listed as follows:
There are certain ‘absolute’ goals, including the elimination of poverty and universal access to water and sanitation. With the previous target of halving extreme poverty successfully reached ahead of schedule, the goal now is to eliminate that remaining 20% of the world living below the line.
One conspicuous absence from the goals is a specific commitment to addressing economic inequality. Even as extreme poverty is being reduced globally, the gap between the richest and poorest citizens of the world is widening. Consumption by the lowest billion amounts to 1% of global figures, while the richest billion account for 72%. With this gap constantly widening, it’s doubtful whether goals to eliminate poverty can ever truly be met. Wealth redistribution would an effective tool at addressing the poorest parts of society.
These revised development goals will be presented by the panel at the U.N. General Assembly in September, with the intention of agreeing on a clear yet ambitious framework and allowing time for its implementation by the beginning of 2016.
– David Wilson
Source: The Guardian,UN
Focusing on the Living, Not the Dying
So much of the emphasis in judging the quality of life of a country, or its progress, focuses on death. The numbers tell how many people die; how many of the dead were mothers, how many were children, the most fatal diseases, the most deaths by violence, etc. Christopher Murray, a Harvard researcher, took issue with this standard of measurement. While he agreed that death was a powerful indicator of a country’s welfare, he also saw a major oversight in using it as a yardstick. To Murray, it was important not solely to focus on the dead, who we can do nothing for, but also examine the quality of life of the living. Not only to think of how to keep people alive but also to ensure they are living well. Murray’s viewpoint was to revolutionize metrics. He spearheaded the shift from measuring mortality to the implementation of the DALY measure – Disability-Adjusted Life Year.
In simplest terms, the DALY measures the number of years a population lives with a disability, adjusting its productivity accordingly (as a major psychological or health problem will undoubtedly decrease a worker’s effectiveness), as well as measuring the impact of shorter life expectancy (often which is related to the disabilities in the DALY). ‘Disability’ in the term covers a wide arrange of conditions, among them pain, arthritis, mental illness such as depression and PTSD, disfigurement and major diseases. A highly sophisticated system, the DALY is weighted to measure the impact of conditions on younger members of a population more than older members to give a more accurate measure of impact on the economic potential of a given population (as the young are seen to have more potential than the aged because of longevity, energy, new skills, etc.).
Measuring the global burden of disease this way has yielded surprising – and often controversial – results. Yet this data is promising and exciting in that it shakes our current system and demands attention to issues that have so far been neglected. For example, depression and suicide are found to be more damaging than tuberculosis or cirrhosis, and one of the fastest-growing diseases is glaucoma. The DALY’s results have not been welcomed by all, however. When first introduced after measuring international statistics, many countries were graded much lower than on an objective mortality scale and hotly contested the results.
The importance of metric systems in foreign aid is steadily increasing: in a world where every dollar could be used in many different ways, expenditure on aid and social programs needs to be well justified, with potential for results from investment. When asked about the use of DALYs to give an accurate picture of the state of global health, Murray stated, “People walk around with a mental map that’s different for every one of us. A real map has got to be a better guide.”
– Farahnaz Mohammed
Source: Discover Magazine
Photo: Change
What is Sequestration?
Se·ques·tra·tion (n) /ˌsēkwiˈstrāSHən/: a four-syllable word that hasn’t been part of average American vocabulary for long. Now the term is ubiquitous, even blamed for a vast number of completely unrelated problems. High gas prices? Must be sequestration. Long wait time on a business license? Probably the sequester. Got a flat tire? That darned sequester is to blame.
So what is sequestration? Etymologically speaking, the verb “sequester” itself derives from the Latin sequester which meant “trustee” or “mediator.” It has links to the root sequi (“to follow”), but by the early 16th century the word “sequester” meant “to seize by authority, confiscate.” Today “sequester” also carries a similar meaning to “isolate” or “withdraw.” In budget contexts, sequestration implies withholding funds normally disbursed.
For the United States government, the Sequester was a massive set of budget cuts enacted by The Budget Control Act of 2011. This Act contained provisions that if the United States Congress could not formulate and pass a federal budget by a certain date, these massive budget cuts would occur across most departments and agencies (about 50/50 between defense and domestic spending). Other countries have proposed and enacted similarly drastic spending cuts to balance their budgets, but have typically called those measures “austerity policies.”
Congress’s threat of sequestration was supposed to incentivize compromise on reducing the deficit in the federal budget. After all, those who support a large defense budget would hopefully work harder to come up with a budget to keep this funding intact; those who support high amounts of domestic spending would fight tooth and nail to pass a budget to avoid those cuts.
Multiple attempts to compromise were made on both sides of the aisle, but in the end, Congress was unable to agree, and the government plunged over what many called “the fiscal cliff.” Many saw this as the point of no return for Congressional compromise — or, rather, the lack thereof; others winced at the blunt nature of the cuts but expressed support for the step towards a balanced federal budget. For invaluable foreign aid programs, however, the sudden budget cuts threaten to hurt many more people than just Americans.
– Naomi Doraisamy
Source: CNN,Online Etymology Dictionary,USA.gov
Photo: Esibytes
The History of the World Food Programme
During international crises, the media often publishes striking images of planes unloading bags and bags of food to distribute to those in need, or air-dropping supplies. Often, these are from the World Food Programme, a branch of the United Nations that focuses entirely on providing food and easing malnutrition in at-risk and needy communities worldwide.
Formed in 1963, the WFP was initially started as a three-year experiment after the director of the U.S. Food for Peace Program spoke of the need for a larger, multilateral food assistance organization. Its success was such that after two years, it was expanded into the branch it is today. In 1994, it adopted a mission statement, a first for any U.N. organization, which established its focus as the following:
The WFP’s programs are not limited to the direct distribution of food. It has expanded to provide food vouchers, implement food for work programs for the poorest members of society, buying food directly from developing countries to support local farmers, and providing food specifically to sufferers of HIV and TB (for whom proper nutrition is especially important.)
Like UNICEF, WFP has attracted significant attention, also in the celebrity sphere. Actress Drew Barrymore, an ambassador for the program, donated $1 million towards its efforts. Football stars Ronaldinho and Kaka, alongside names like Penelope Cruz, Rachel Weisz, and Sean Connery have also supported the WFP’s efforts.
The WFP’s impact is indisputable: in 2011, it provided close to 4 million tons of food to nearly 99 million people, alongside their other growing programs. They have one of the best track records for aid agencies in terms of cost-effectiveness, with their administration costs reported to be only around 7%. And they are funded entirely by donors and governments who provided an impressive 3.73 billion dollars in 2011.
– Farahnaz Mohammed
Source: World Food Programme
Photo: Wikipedia:World Food Programme
Macklemore & Lewis Address Global Poverty
Macklemore & Ryan Lewis are a fairly new artist/producer group that has quickly risen to fame through their popular song, “Thrift Shop.” Criticizing mainstream media, consumerism, and popular culture, this hip-hop group has a lot in common with the work being done at The Borgen Project. Raising these questions is essential to understanding not only the condition of the United States but also the state of the world.
Gaining considerable exposure within the music industry in the past year, Macklemore & Ryan Lewis have released their full-length album The Heist, hitting the number one spot on iTunes.
Macklemore & Ryan Lewis are proud to be from humble beginnings and proud to support the “alternative” lifestyle of anti-consumerism. Deciding not to sign with any record label, the group is completely independent and produces their own music with their own flare.
Thinking under the lens of global poverty, “Thrift Shop” raises a number of ethical concerns. On one hand, Macklemore & Ryan Lewis are criticizing the United States culture of consumerism. A lyric from the song explains:
“They be like “Oh that Gucci, that’s hella tight”
I’m like “Yo, that’s fifty dollars for a t-shirt”
Limited edition, let’s do some simple addition
…I call that getting tricked by business”
Here, the group brings attention to the arbitrary nature of clothing, calling out branding as a mere print on some cloth, and propose, throughout the rest of the song, that spending 99 cents on an otherwise expensive jacket is a much better option.
Alternatively, we look that the main hook of the song with a somewhat critical eye in relation to global (rather than only domestic) poverty:
“I’m gonna pop some tags
only got 20 dollars in my pocket
I’m, I’m I’m runnin’, looking for a come up”
All humor aside, the group is bringing attention to the fact that $20 for clothes is considered insanely cheap in the United States. However, while American consumers think that they are being frugal, $20 is far more than most people in the world make in one year. That much money, in much of the world, could be used much more effectively to feed a family. However, while the monetary value is relative—what may be cheaper in the U.S. is expensive elsewhere—Macklemore & Ryan Lewis advocate for frugal living no matter what the exchange rate, leaving the quality of their beats far from impoverished.
– Kali Faulwetter
Sources: Rap Genius
Photo: MTV