Goats, toilets and international charity

[Edie]

Was reading about how buying goats for poor families in Africa is probably a bad idea. My brother buys stuff like goats and sponsors toilets and it’s always seemed… weird and patronising to me: Scientists caution against giving animals as gifts to developing countries

And my bloke who is from Kenya but with strong links to Ethiopia says what was noticeable in the 80s was how little aid money actually got down to the ground.

My mum sponsors a kid and gets a letter once a year but that makes me cringe too. I don’t give to any international charity and give to uk kids ones only. But I do question that as obviously kids in developing countries live in absolute and not just relative poverty.

Is there a difference between aid and charity and is it ever a good idea or is it always fundamentally imperialist?

 

[SpookyFrank]

It's getting the buggers into the jiffy bag in the first place that I struggle with.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

It's getting the buggers into the jiffy bag in the first place that I struggle with.

Gift wrapping a goat is a bitch. They just eat their way through the wrapping and you have to start all over again.

 

[Teaboy]

I think its well accepted now that historically a lot of money that was raised ended up being stolen or spent on projects of very questionable value to the people who needed it the most. That's not to say that good things were not achieved because they clearly were.

Of course there has been more recent scandals involving OXFAM and I've also heard stories from a friend who worked for another famous international charity that didn't impress me.

I think choosing carefully the particular charity you wish to support can help but there is always going to be problems and the amount of money spent on the good causes the charity is about will never be as much as we would like.

Separately from that it does seem that a lot of wankers end up working in the charity sector in management roles. There have been loads of stories on this board about being treated badly whilst working for charity and a good friend works for a pretty famous UK charity and the boss there is a terrible person by all accounts.

 

[tim]

The main scientist quoted is Jane Goodall a primatologist not can expert on soil degragation. She's part of that group that push for stringent population control and believe that Africa exists for the exotic fauna rather than the people who live there. Oxfam has had its issues about sexual abuse by its employees and these projects are to some extent liberal gestures. However, I would trust Oxfam's agronomical expertise over Goodall's and buying a goat might make a few people's lives a lot better.

 

[MickiQ]

I would say aid is handed out by governments and charity is handed out by individuals, According to the last dinky little pie chart HMRC sent me (they seem to have stop sending them) they spent 1.1% of the income tax I paid to the tune of £106.67 on overseas aid. As to whether that aid is spent on goats or a private jet for El Presidente I don't get a say on what it's spent on or whether I get to pay it. Charity is the money I give personally of my own choice to causes I care about.
My favourite "Fighting Poverty and Hunger" charity is the Trussell Trust to whom I give both money and actual stuff, I'm pretty certain if I turned up at their door with a goat they would accuse me of taking the piss.

 

[NoXion]

I don't know if Sankara ever actually said this (can't trust nuttin' these days), but I think that the distinction this quote makes is important:

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

I don't know if Sankara ever actually said this (can't trust nuttin' these days), but I think that the distinction this quote makes is important:

A lot of the grain that's sent for aid is just a way to prop up commodity prices for farmers at home.

 

[NoXion]

A lot of the grain that's sent for aid is just a way to prop up commodity prices for farmers at home.

No doubt it also has a terrible effect on the incomes of farmers in the areas into which said grain is imported. How can you compete with free? It's impossible.

 

[StoneRoad]

It is a very thorny question.

Does the aid you are trying to give actually benefit the people you want ?
I would tend to go with one of the smaller and more specialist charities, rather than ones with big expensive HQs and CEOs.

One thing I have donated to, is the RNLI's drowning prevention program & flood assistance.
Another couple of aims that I would support are educational and appropriate technology.
Also MSF [mediceine sans frontiers] ...

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

No doubt it also has a terrible effect on the incomes of farmers in the areas into which said grain is imported. How can you compete with free? It's impossible.

I might also be leery of help involving fertilizers, seeds, and equipment. Sometimes that's just used to lock local farmers into industrial agricultural models that don't really benefit them.

 

[bimble]

you know, sometimes theres just no food, like a few years ago in malawi, everyone relies on maize and there was just none, cos the government there had failed to stockpile and the harvests all failed due to weather and insect blight and the country was too poor to compete to buy it. That means people had nothing to eat.
A lot of really simplistic stuff on this thread. It's complicated. People who work in this sector are not all bleeding heart idiot imperialists. Climate-resistant agricultural diversification programs (tools seeds training etc) are massive btw and have been for decades, shipping bags of grain is not really what charities do 99% of the time. "teach a man to fish " is not some new idea its the oldest and most often invoked cliche in the whole field.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

It's complicated.

^This.

 

[Sasaferrato]

We give by DDI to Save the Children, Sightsavers and Water Aid.

Save the Children because there are always starving children. The other two are practical and specific, going blind from trachoma, Trachoma - Wikipedia, which can be cured for a few quid is hideous, and clean water is something that we take for granted, but a lot of the world doesn't have. We are going to add Smile Train, again a specific purpose charity.

 

[JimW]

When I worked in poverty alleviation the two major strands of what we did were access to education and microfinance - small loans that allowed farming women to develop a sideline enterprise which could enhance household income - that usually meant buying piglets to raise but sometimes handicrafts or even starting up a shop. That model is not without its problems, can introduce market imperatives (which is seen as desirable by many including state here but obviously not without issues) and some of the classic grameen style models were a bit burdensome with the meetings and whatnot. But really there was no substitute for having a family member working away in the city and getting a wage for a near term income boost, which points to what I took away from the experience, that here certainly there's no real place for sustainable subsistence farming communities in the capitalist mode of modernity - not only would capital and the state prefer big agribusinesses, the social changes with urbanisation and so on mean rural people start to feel left out and the young move away. I don't think it had to happen that way but the horse has bolted in China at least, despite a small bit of back to the land romanticism among disgruntled urbanites and of course the stubborn minority who would rather make a go of village life.
TLDR, no solution but revolution

 

[bimble]

When I worked in poverty alleviation the two major strands of what we did were access to education and microfinance - small loans that allowed farming women to develop a sideline enterprise which could enhance household income - that usually meant buying piglets to raise but sometimes handicrafts or even starting up a shop. That model is not without its problems, can introduce market imperatives (which is seen as desirable by many including state here but obviously not without issues) and some of the classic grameen style models were a bit burdensome with the meetings and whatnot. But really there was no substitute for having a family member working away in the city and getting a wage for a near term income boost, which points to what I took away from the experience, that here certainly there's no real place for sustainable subsistence farming communities in the capitalist mode of modernity - not only would capital and the state prefer big agribusinesses, the social changes with urbanisation and so on mean rural people start to feel left out and the young move away. I don't think it had to happen that way but the horse has bolted in China at least, despite a small bit of back to the land romanticism among disgruntled urbanites and of course the stubborn minority who would rather make a go of village life.
TLDR, no solution but revolution

Did you see what just happened in India though? Big victory for the small farmers, who banded together basically created a protest city and refused to go home for a year.

After a Year-Long Strike, Indian Farmers Score a Big Win - Inequality.org

inequality.org

 

[JimW]

Did you see what just happened in India though? Big victory for the small farmers, who banded together basically created a protest city and refused to go home for a year.

After a Year-Long Strike, Indian Farmers Score a Big Win - Inequality.org

inequality.org

I have been half following that - must admit I wrote the above in ignorance of much of the world beyond China but my impression is the same imperatives are pushing people off the land there - but this sort of collective action and success is really encouraging. I do think people would like to farm if it wasn't so hard and unrewarding.

 

[Edie]

When I worked in poverty alleviation the two major strands of what we did were access to education and microfinance - small loans that allowed farming women to develop a sideline enterprise which could enhance household income - that usually meant buying piglets to raise but sometimes handicrafts or even starting up a shop. That model is not without its problems, can introduce market imperatives (which is seen as desirable by many including state here but obviously not without issues) and some of the classic grameen style models were a bit burdensome with the meetings and whatnot. But really there was no substitute for having a family member working away in the city and getting a wage for a near term income boost, which points to what I took away from the experience, that here certainly there's no real place for sustainable subsistence farming communities in the capitalist mode of modernity - not only would capital and the state prefer big agribusinesses, the social changes with urbanisation and so on mean rural people start to feel left out and the young move away. I don't think it had to happen that way but the horse has bolted in China at least, despite a small bit of back to the land romanticism among disgruntled urbanites and of course the stubborn minority who would rather make a go of village life.
TLDR, no solution but revolution

I once had a professional arrangement ( ) with a man who was involved in setting up the 10,000 women project for Goldman Sachs. That always struck me as a very cool initiative:

Goldman Sachs | 10,000 Women | An Initiative to Provide Business & Management Education to Female Entrepreneurs in Emerging Markets

Goldman Sachs 10,000 Women is a global initiative that fosters economic growth by providing women entrepreneurs around the world with a business and management education, networking, and access to capital.

www.goldmansachs.com

 

[JimW]

I once had a professional arrangement ( ) with a man who was involved in setting up the 10,000 women project for Goldman Sachs. That always struck me as a very cool initiative:

Goldman Sachs | 10,000 Women | An Initiative to Provide Business & Management Education to Female Entrepreneurs in Emerging Markets

Goldman Sachs 10,000 Women is a global initiative that fosters economic growth by providing women entrepreneurs around the world with a business and management education, networking, and access to capital.

www.goldmansachs.com

Pah, should be teaching them to strip an AK and jerry rig a guillotine

 

[LDC]

One of the first books I read that 'politicized' me was How the Other Half Dies by Susan George that, while not strictly about aid (from what I recall) does delve into the fucked up dynamics of related issues. I've also worked a bit in East Africa and the Middle East and the place is littered with well-meaning but ultimately pointless (at best) and highly destructive (at worst) attempts by NGOs and similar to 'improve' the lives of people there.

I think there are some worthwhile projects though; not surprisingly those led by women living in the project area are often better, as are those that fulfill some long term aim to foster less reliance on aid etc. What JimW said basically.

 

[bimble]

There are some absolutely brilliant projects out there. Thing is the brilliant ones are always (imo) locally run & usually small. To get money from abroad they almost always need to get picked up on by some big international intermediary.
The entrepreneurial stuff is incredibly popular & easy to get funding for but it’s fraught with difficulties and very often totally fails, unless it’s done with loads of local knowledge (of what will actually work as a source of income and doesn’t just sound nice in the fundraising literature).

 

[LDC]

Some of them are also clearly scams by the people living there milking well meaning Western liberals of their cash, especially the gap year crowd, so those aren't problematic or destructive as such, just not exactly what the people who think they're helping others think they are!

 

[bimble]

Oh, of course. Where it’s tourist money it’s a different story. There’s whole fake orphanages with kidnapped children in.

 

[Edie]

There are some absolutely brilliant projects out there. Thing is the brilliant ones are always (imo) locally run & usually small. To get money from abroad they almost always need to get picked up on by some big international intermediary.
The entrepreneurial stuff is incredibly popular & easy to get funding for but it’s fraught with difficulties and very often totally fails, unless it’s done with loads of local knowledge (of what will actually work as a source of income and doesn’t just sound nice in the fundraising literature).

Any pointers to gooduns?

 

[bimble]

Any pointers to gooduns?

Yes! What’s your area of interest? As in who do you want to help or where, or in what sort of way.
As a general rule though you can search any uk based charity on the charities database and see their accounts, look for maximum funds spent on the actual projects not on salaries renting of London offices fundraising etc.

 

[Edie]

Yes! What’s your area of interest?

Sustainable, locally run and administered, women-led enterprises (ie not just aid).

 

[bimble]

Sustainable, locally run and administered, women-led enterprises (ie not just aid).

Off the top of my head I can vouch for these people, but will think more.

Education for women and girls | WONDER Foundation

We empower women and girls through access to education and vocational training, so they can exit poverty for good.

wonderfoundation.org.uk

 

[JimW]

One of the best we worked with was a group of older seamstresses from the non-Han minority who lived in the most isolated mountain bits the incomers hadn't nicked, they did the really intensively stitched bridal outfits that were traditional, starting a bit of a revival, injecting some cultural pride and passing down disappearing skills, all while making money and friends. Did the fantastic quilted waiscoats the men wore shepherding too and regret not buying one.

 

[Puddy_Tat]

It's complicated.

indeed. most things are.

if people in [insert name of 'developing country' here] are starving today (either due to long term problems or a short term emergency) then the argument that 'we' should give them ploughs and fertiliser rather than something for immediate needs isn't entirely constructive.

but yes, immediate needs without something for long term infrastructure (and by that there's transport, power, clean water, health and education) also isn't constructive.

how much should be aid (government), charity (individuals) or reparations for colonialism?

a fair amount of 'charity' makes me faintly uncomfortable - the 'white saviour' syndrome, the 'deserving / undeserving poor' judgement, the question of 'raising awareness' or whether some of the big / corporate / celeb supported charity things are more about ego / celebrity career / corporate public image than anything else. i'm an atheist and don't make a habit of quoting chunks of bible, but some people who consider themselves christians don't seem to have read the early verses of matthew 6

i agree that it's reasonable that charities should give some information about what they are doing rather than just expect people to hand money over and hope for the best, but caught some advert on the telly recently where you could sponsor a child and expect a letter from them each year (presumably expressing their gratitude) - ugh.

government 'aid' can come with too many strings attached (buy our weaponry, buy stuff from our favoured corporates)

and then there's the question of potential corruption (not that western governments are entirely corruption free) - how do 'we' do anything about that without verging on colonialism?

having said that, the anti charity / aid line can often be a thin cover for 'we don't want to give money to those non-white foreigners' and the 'charity begins at home' line often comes from people who aren't very charitable towards 'our own' either.

i'm still not sure what the answer is.

 

[urbanspaceman]

Is there an alternative that is likely to really help people, and bypass the tainted aid/government nexus ? Perhaps - there are several organisations that are funding micro-solar through local partners in (mostly) Africa. Using small loans, people can buy a package comprising solar panels, battery, rechargeable torch, phone charger, and a some LED lighting, sized for the needs of one household. And slightly bigger installations can power irrigation pumps, fridges, TV, etc. What I like about this model is that the money buys actual hardware, and since the recipients are paying for it out of their own pockets (while still coming out ahead economically, even during the loan payback period), the equipment is much more likely to be actually installed and properly maintained. The flow of money back to the lender is also a flow of information, confirming that the equipment is installed and working. The immediate and secondary knock-on benefits of having solar electricity are so many, various and compelling that it could take paragraphs to describe them.

I have made investments through these three debt crowdfunding organisations in a variety of solar projects in Africa:
www.lendahand.co.uk
www.bettervest.com/en/
www.jointrine.com

The interest rate is typically about 6%. Given that these are unsecured loans with a high risk of default, the rate is lower than it would be on a commercial basis, and so this slightly impaired risk-return metric can be viewed as a sort of pro-bono act. Money returned can be recycled again and again, so amplifying the original principal. Also, you can use IFISAs (Innovative Finance ISAs) to shelter from tax.

There's also Kiva, which doesn't pay interest, but does aim to return the principal:
www.kiva.org