In many cases, the central message of local capacity building is one that addresses inequities of power. There is widespread agreement that the NGO-client relationship is skewed, by default, to embellish the importance of the NGO provider and overlook or underestimate the role of the recipients (Minear, 2002). To echo Mary Anderson (2000a), victims of disaster are often treated as passive, helpless recipients of aid. The increasingly technical nature of aid means that greater attention is granted to the impressive resources, training, and gadgets brought in by foreign agencies.
The “CNN factor” is partially responsible for drawing attention away from local capacity towards the accomplishments of international agencies through their selective coverage. INGOs often vie for the media spotlight, hoping to increase their visibility and multiply their funding base (Minear, 2002, p. 65). Moreover, relief and development practitioners with specialized degrees and training may unknowingly carry an air of arrogance and superiority, inherently believing they are more capable and knowledgeable than the population with whom they are working. As a result, INGO staff are often paid more and given greater access to technologies (Minear, 2002). Yet Manji said, “Inequality never built capacity” (as cited in Eade, 1998, p. 9). Therefore, empowerment and capacity building rightfully challenge power imbalances in the INGO-client relationship. A programmatic emphasis on local capacity building will, at its best, seek to address these inequities of power.
Focusing on local capacity building also reorients relief and development agencies towards longer term, sustainable results. When considering the long-term life and impact of a project, practitioners come to realize the crucial roles that locals must play. Without local leadership and community ownership, programs are likely to fail.
[i] To read the WB’s analysis of the positive links between empowerment and development effectiveness, see Narayan (2002) pgs. 1-8. In summary, the WB sees direct correlation through “ its impact on good governance and growth, on helping growth to be pro-poor, and on the outcomes of development projects” (p. 2).
[ii] Tomas Dozier, director and founder of ADE in Costa Rica, recalls how his community reacted after a 6.1 earthquake in 2009 destroyed buildings and infrastructure in the region. Knowing that international aid would most likely be forthcoming, several families tore down their own homes in order to receive more assistance. This is a drastic but real example of the powerfully negative effects of dependency.
REFERENCES
Alsop, R. B., Mette; Holland, Jeremy. (2006). Empowerment in practice: from analysis to implementation Washington DC: The World Bank.
Anderson, M. (2000a). Do No Harm - How Aid can Support Peace or War. Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Minear, L. (2002). The Humanitarian Enterprise. Bloomfield: Kumarian Press.
In 2010 I conducted research on the concept of capacity building for a disaster and relief mitigation graduate course at Eastern University. I share excerpts from my research here, in a series of posts called Capacity Building: What Does it Take?
Focusing on local capacity building also reorients relief and development agencies towards longer term, sustainable results. When considering the long-term life and impact of a project, practitioners come to realize the crucial roles that locals must play. Without local leadership and community ownership, programs are likely to fail.
The World Bank has noted a positive correlation between empowerment and development outcomes (Alsop, 2006).[i] There is nothing sustainable and effective about programs that rely upon the continual inflow of foreign resources. To avoid this scenario, agencies should avoid flying into an area with their prescribed plans and assumptions; instead, focusing on local participation and capacity building will prepare a community for complete ownership of programs. Program plans generated by communities will guarantee local investment and increase the chances of long-term sustainability. Eade (1998) insists that aid and development programs serve to either increase clients’ dependency on foreign assistance, or to empower them by bolstering their self-reliance (p. 15). In other words, INGO programs will have an effect on local capacity. In order to avoid dependency, agencies must make concerted efforts to work alongside locals and include them in development initiatives.[ii]
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTES
[i] To read the WB’s analysis of the positive links between empowerment and development effectiveness, see Narayan (2002) pgs. 1-8. In summary, the WB sees direct correlation through “ its impact on good governance and growth, on helping growth to be pro-poor, and on the outcomes of development projects” (p. 2).
[ii] Tomas Dozier, director and founder of ADE in Costa Rica, recalls how his community reacted after a 6.1 earthquake in 2009 destroyed buildings and infrastructure in the region. Knowing that international aid would most likely be forthcoming, several families tore down their own homes in order to receive more assistance. This is a drastic but real example of the powerfully negative effects of dependency.
REFERENCES
Alsop, R. B., Mette; Holland, Jeremy. (2006). Empowerment in practice: from analysis to implementation Washington DC: The World Bank.
Anderson, M. (2000a). Do No Harm - How Aid can Support Peace or War. Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Minear, L. (2002). The Humanitarian Enterprise. Bloomfield: Kumarian Press.
In 2010 I conducted research on the concept of capacity building for a disaster and relief mitigation graduate course at Eastern University. I share excerpts from my research here, in a series of posts called Capacity Building: What Does it Take?
No comments:
Post a Comment