This post was originally meant to be a comment on Ida’s ‘In whose interest do the NGO’s and aid-agencies work for?’, but after writing for about ten minutes, I decided that this warranted its own post. This is indeed an interesting topic that links to a much deeper philosophical discussion on ‘service’ work.
Finally, the last thing I’d like to point out is that in the end, perfection is close to impossible. Everyone makes mistakes or gets it wrong sometimes, even if they have the best intentions at heart. (This is not counting those that do not have the community’s best interest at heart however). What is important is that there are people out there who still care, still engage and still believe in a better world, and that we are learning from our mistakes. We’re being criticised in forums such as these and turning our shortfalls into learning opportunities for the benefit of other NGO’s and ultimately the communities we work to serve.
See: EWB Failure Reports, Guardian Article: NGO hopes to benefit from failure, Admittingfailure.com
Some more reading if you’re interested. Engineer-chic: Global Citizens, Critical Reflections
Rhea, yes, I agree your response warranted a separate pot in itself. This is a key issue when blogging – IF YOUR RESPONSE IS GOING TO BE AS LONG AS OR LONGER THAN THE ORIGINAL THEN WRITE A SEPARATE POST
With that out of the I am sorry but I have to disagree with you on a couple of points
The first being -Firstly, I don’t think you can lump all NGO’s into two categories: local and foreign.-
Yes you can based on whether the NGO has been set up and is run by an indigenous person/group/community or whether it has been set up by foreigners and has come /gone to work in a foreign land- this category would include the likes of Oxfam, Actionaid and such like- although they may employ locals for their country office.
Second
Back to the question: in whose interest do NGO’s work for? I really cant say that NGO’s work exclusively for the interests of the community, because I don’t believe they do or should. What I can say, is that it is the purpose of the organisation to ensure the best possible benefit to the community, and the role of institutions such as universities and NGO’s to ensure they develop their members to this end>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This has left me somewhat confused- NGOs are set up to address community needs as far as I know and when you apply to set up/register one the application requires you to spell out your objectives and chances are if this is for the benefit of just an individual you will be turned down- at least this is true in Uganda.
NGOs should work exclusively to meet community needs and stay well clear of Politics for instance- this is not to say that they should not work with Politicians, especially if this improves the lives/ benefits the community within which they are working.
If NGOs should not work exclusively for communities and in the interest of the community, then unless I have missed something , I would say there would be no point to their existence
Thanks for the passionate response Ida! Its great to see that we’re evoking this kind of discourse.
On your first point, I do agree that yes,there are foreign aid workers do come into African (or any third world) setting for a set period of time and leave.Some do this just to get brownie points back home and sometimes what they leave behind isn’t particularly sustainable or meaningful…actually, in some cases they cause more harm than good. I take your point. But what I’m saying is that not ALL foreign aid workers come in as ‘aid workers’, doling out handouts and not considering the long-term consequences. Some foreign NGO’s come in with genuine intentions to create sustainable capabilities within communities. Having a wealth of resources and experience on their side is another advantage. On the other hand, not all locally led NGO’s have the community’s best interest at heart either! They could be politically driven, or make mistakes too. What I’m trying to say is that no matter what type of organisation you belong to, or what type of work you’re doing, you need to consider carefully the impact you are making to the community, working with them to achieve maximum, long-term benefit.
And as for NGO’s only being about benefiting the community, I disagree with you on two counts. One, yes the purpose of many NGO’s is to meet needs of communities. What I’m saying however is that by default, the organisation and its members also benefit. I have benefited from engaging in community-based, EWB projects. The managerial skills (amongst others) I have learnt not only benefit me in my personal career as an engineer, but I am funneling those skills back into my organisation to help grow EWB nationally. Furthermore, I’m using these skills in my work with ASME on a global scale. These two organisations in turn have the capability of inciting social change in a way far greater than my personal capacity allows, developing more engineers like me and serving more and more communities. All benefit, not just the community.
And two, some NGO’s are not directly about serving community needs. Some, such as SAWomEng (SA Women in Engineering) and ASME seek primarily to develop their members, empowering them to better serve society as a whole.
So no, I still maintain that NGO’s should not and cannot mislead themselves and others to think that the sole beneficiaries are the communities they serve.
Oh I agree re: discourse and by way of response
Assuming that the the skills you and the ladies in SA Women in Engineering have gained are used for the benefit of the community , then please help me understand how it is the NGOS are not set up for the benefit of the community?
Some NGOs will have as their strategy the transfer of skills and or technology to benefit the community in which they work but will implement this by training a few in the community who can then train others/the rest of the community. This might be due to available funding or other variables.
I suppose what we need here is a definition of what a community is as we are clear that an NGO is that Non Governmental Organization- whose role in my humble opinion is that old saying THE DEVIL IS IN THE DETAIL
In defining the community – I would start with the individual’s definition of what it means to them. Is it a sense of belonging perhaps, or is it a geographical entity
Yes, I suppose you are right…it all depends on your definition of ‘community’. If by ‘community’ you mean society as a whole, then of course NGO’s are there to serve the community. If by ‘community’ you mean the impoverished or disadvantaged group of people an NGO would seek to assist, then the community is not the sole, exclusive beneficiary. Although regardless, yes you are right again, the community should still be the ultimate and primary beneficiary. (whether it is or not…well…)
I suppose the devil is in the details…although I prefer architect Mies van der Rohe’s famous take on the phrase: “God is in the details”.
As aid workers, despite which kind of organization in which we work, I think we must be very careful to examine our role in ‘implementing partners’ losing ties to their constituencies. I recommend this great piece by Hakima Abbas on Pambazuka News, which questions the role of outside entities in the developmental process. He writes: “”…the ever-expanding NGO industrial complex separates and depoliticises service and advocacy while failing to question its own role in weakening African institutions, power and self-determination.” http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/68797
Yes, some international NGOs are working out of a rights-based approach and have begun to recognise the importance of supporting local organisations and social movements to be sovereign. But despite the speak of “rights,” we continue to witness Southern organisations or “partners” being assessed and rebuilt into more professional organisations that lose their character and represent only the interests of the community that align with funding or Northern NGO guidelines. As someone who focuses on organizational development, this leads me back to Ida’s original question again and again – whose interests are really being served?
It’s time for those of us within and outside of the aid industry to challenge and abandon the vestiges of “expertise infusion” leftover from modernist and racist perspectives of “development.” Our most pressing challenge is not to differentiate our efforts, but to ensure a more inclusive development discourse that genuinely listens to and adapts to the needs of those the system is claiming to serve.
I totally agree with you about maintaining an authentic sense of identity instead of trying to become a carbon copy of a structured, foreign aid-organisation.
This is something I have been thinking about as I work with others to grow and develop Engineers Without Borders in South Africa. This organisation is spread throughout the world, mostly in first world countries. But the type of work, outlook and identity we as EWB South Africa will have should be very different to that of say EWB USA doing a project in South Africa!
The challenge is, how do we become and stay recognised by our parent organisation EWB International, whilst remaining true to ourselves and our purpose of uplifting the poorest and most institutionally disadvantaged South African citizens? This is something we have realised, which is the first step. And its good that we’ve realised this so early on, before out systems and structures have been put into place. Interestingly enough, EWB Canada have opted out of the EWB-I structures, and have developed a set of rules unique to their views of social-change as opposed to project work! EWB SA definitely will have to look hard at our unique conditions in developing our mission and identity.
Please get in contact so we can discuss this further, I would love to hear more about your work with organisational development. And this is a great talk from TED that should interest you: http://goo.gl/UtZLS