Am I useless? A critic needs to listen to critics

I would only say that in my view too much soul searching is not always productive. Perhaps, many of your critics have as much experience in the development business as you have. Perhaps they have a different sense of humour. However, you seem to be more popular than many of them.

BUT would it be possible at all for us to pin you down? Could you tell us what do you think works in development and then commit some time and resources to do it? We could then do a triple blind randomised sample evaluation of your project.

I remember the first time I read a paper by Bill I thought “Yes! Yes! He gets it and he’s saying it! Take that everyone!”…

But then I progressed in my career and came face to face with the bottlenecks my own bosses must have faced (that I wasn’t fully aware of nor could fully appreciate when I first started) and I became a bit less critical of individuals. I understood how all the absurdities continue and I suddenly turned into that same absurd aid worker that I used to criticize.

Bill’s criticisms again, are not wrong. And I appreciate his recognizing the systemic limitations over the individuals. But by creating a (false) dichotomy between searchers and planners …is like saying people are either good or bad. Planners are limited by systems too….just bc you are HQ-based – you can’t just change the rules of the game…there is no magic group of elite rulers that can wave their wand and put things aright. The system is huge, messy, intricate, decentralized.

I would just like to see someone like Bill try to apply his criticisms in the field himself. It would make for good field research if anything. It’s just to easy to pose as the snarky cynic from a safe distance – that’s where the loss of respect/credibility comes from for me. Like single/childless people that try to tell parents they shouldn’t yell at their kids…sure they might be “right” but when you are the one up to your neck in the madness…

Dear Professor Easterly,
I am a strong believer in both satire and criticism, the former being one of the most precious gifts of the rational being. From Jonathan Swift to The Onion, there is a deep need for satire yet there will always be those who shy away from it. You rightly embrace your own dissenters, but please keep up your good work. It is refreshing.

Is the satire here a bit over the top sometimes? Perhaps. But even the Onion has a fair amount of meaningless/over the top satire that misses the mark. Its not easy to do good satire all the time.

Prof. Easterly, I think it’s great that you are listening to critics. But people read this blog because they want an independent perspective from someone who can be harsh and critical. There is an enormous amount of media and political rhetoric calling for more and more aid, and very little discussion about the problems inherent in it. Even if this blog is only right about 50% of the time in its critique, that’s much better than the status quo. That’s the whole idea of dialogue–someone proposes an idea, then it gets batted around and eventually someone figures out a better way to do things. Dialogue in development-speak, on the other hand, means we all agree to vague principles that leave plenty of wiggle-room and include so many different perspectives that its effectively meaningless.

Finally, a lot of the criticisms of Easterly are coming from (big surprise) professional development workers. Yes, there needs to be understanding for the issues aid workers face–but this blog is not about aid workers. It is about “aid reaching the poor”. The poor don’t comment on this blog because they lack the means to advocate for their own perspective on aid. Nor do most taxpayers comment, even though they fund a substantial portion of the development projects undertaken by US NGOs. It is simply not credible to have one realistic understanding of aid among aid workers and another fairy tale narrative given to the general public. If this blog changes anything, I hope it exposes some of the hypocrisy between what people claim development can do and what it in fact often does.

Additionally, to those of you who want to read more substantive ideas from Easterly, read his books. This blog is simply bits and pieces of his larger theory on development.

But how many of you that applaud Easterly’s efforts – and work in the aid industry – actually do anything concrete to “change the system”? I’m gonna bet little to none. You criticize online – but have no problem taking the paycheck home? Would you actually tell your Exec Directors that you think their planning processes are BS? Yeah, right. I call that cowardly.

SEARCHERS ARE THINKING IN SYSTEMS & KNOW THE POWER OF FEEDBACK. ELSE, THIS POST WOULD HAVE NEVER EXISTED.

PROFESSOR EASTERLY: PLEASE DO KEEP ON SEARCHING FOR THE IDEAL DESIGN OF AID SYSTEM THAT BENEFIT THE UNDERDEVELOPED COUNTRIES, THE VULNERABLE AND THE POOR. IT MIGHT BE GOOD THOUGH, AS SOME CLAIM, TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF “THE GOOD PROJECTS AND PRACTICES TOO”. PROBABLY THEY ARE THE ONES THAT THE “NEW SYSTEM” SHOULD BE BUILT AROUND.

I HEARD SOMEWHERE THAT A GOOD COACH IS SUPPOSED TO GIVE 7 POSITIVE REINFORCEMENT FEEDBACK REMARKS VERSUS 1 CONFRONTING (OR NEGATIVE IF YOU WILL) FEEDBACK REMARK, IN ORDER TO OPTIMIZE HIS/HER COACHEE’S (OR TEAM’S) PERFORMANCE. (SO THEY WONT CRY TOO LOUD AND/OR RUN AWAY, OR PROBABLY TRY TO SMACK YOU ON THE HEAD).

STILL, AFTER SUMMING UP ALL CURRENT EXISTING AID FEEDBACKS, SOME MAY CLAIM THAT YOU CAN STILL KEEP BEING
CYNICAL AND SNARKY. THEY MIGHT SAY THAT THERE’S STILL A LOT OF WIGGLE ROOM, AND THAT THE RATIO MIGHT STILL BE AROUND 11 TO 1 (INCLUDING YOUR SNARKYNESS). SOME MAY NOT. – WHO IS KEEPING SCORE? -

IN THAT CASE, THE PROBLEM WOULD NOW RELY ON BEING ABLE TO KEEP SCORING (BRINGING DOWN THE SCORE TO THE OPTIMAL 7 TO 1), AND AT THE SAME TIME KEEP SAYING ENOUGH POSITIVE THINGS. IN SHORT: AVOIDING THE SWEEP (11-0) WHILE BRINGING THE SCORE DOWN TO THE OPTIMAL (7-1).

- ISN’T THAT WHAT YOU DO BEST? WHAT IS GOING ON?

———-
“CHANGE HURTS, EVEN CHANGING SHOES” I DONT KNOW WHO SAID THIS.
———

PS: NOW THAT THE WORD “SYSTEM” IS APPEARING EVERYWHERE, I THOUGHT YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN THE FOLLOWING READINGS ABOUT SYSTEMS, FEEDBACK AND LEVERAGE POINTS.

link 1 –> http://bit.ly/cunZWW
link 2 –> http://bit.ly/9ZYIo4
link 3 –> http://bit.ly/cb6Q9A
link 4 –> http://bit.ly/a31tQf

BEST,

PIOLON

Blog is amusing but I guess people on the frontlines are always going to be annoyed by criticism coming from those on the sidelines. Like being in the car with a back-seat driver.

I’m not actually in the aid industry but this is what I am understanding from the comments.

Sorry for this misinformed question…but…who is the “ruling power” of the aid world? Who could actually make central changes that would ripple across the entire industry? Is there such thing?

Cheers,
George

Can’t claim to decide who “wins” at comments but….the fact that none of the people commenting on this blog are neither poor themselves nor at the receiving end of aid monies (well, other than salaries means that none of us can claim to speak for them. And as if there is a ‘them’ or ‘poor’ anyway! C’mon surely we all know that and I don’t need to launch into non-homogeneity etc.

Bob K – yes I agree with your dislike of the “one realistic understanding among aid workers” vs. the Fairy Tale fed to the public. But isn’t this true of most things? Doesn’t make it ok…but it also means it’s not particular to Aid. Does the general public care to hear to learn more about foreign policy in general? Hospital workers have their horror stories, teachers have theirs, religious organizations, etc. I personally have been shocked by recent allegations made against Scientology

Everything seems to have an underbelly and a Wizard of Oz. Bill pulls the curtain on Aid but I bet he has his own curtain too….

Nonetheless – as Bill says himself re: the Millenium Villages…they are not sustainable/scalable bc you eventually still run up against the same old walls of corruption, ethnic clashes, etc.

Even if Aid was better executed…that doesn’t answer the question of power clashes, divisions, etc. I am a firm believer in participation and wish aid was more demand-driven than supply-driven…but even if it WERE demand-driven….I’m not sure that we would see poor people agreeing on too much…they don’t seem to now anyway.

Aid Watch is DEFINITELY NOT useless. The media (internet and otherwise) is full of information touting the efficacy of foreign aid (sometimes as if it self-evidently so) often without a shred of evidence. The internet needs at least one blog authored by people who know about what they speak providing a realistic evaluation and critique of aid policies.

I am thoroughly enjoying the commentary on the commentary. For better or worse, Bill is responsible for stimulating the discussion on this particular blog. Kudos!

My ability to travel in Africa as an independent global citizen has enabled me to have honest and sincere conversations with many people on both sides of the aid debate. I have listened to the good, bad, and the ugly from all sides. Through it all we need to discover the truth and deal with facts. Most of the debate is led by Eurocentric white westerners that like to stimulate themselves with this mental masturbation. None of us are stakeholders in the successes or failures of any of the theories or strategies that we criticize or champion.

I find it interesting that when I research many of the individuals involved in the aid and relief industry, including Christian missionaries, that they lack personal relationships with the people and communities that they “have a heart for” and want to “empower” and provide “sustainable development”. Not everyone in these communites or countries lack access to technology or social networking tools. My particular passion is to see Africans helping Africans and do what I can to support their efforts.

I have heard many locals refer to some of the aid and relief workers as “vultures” and “vampires” because they feed upon the blood of their people. However they are smart enough not to bite the hand that feeds them. The perpetuation of many of these failed policies can be attributed to the politeness of locals who do not want to offend overbearing and arrogant “humanitarians” that inevitably would see them as being ungrateful.

When a UNICEF director in Uganda refered to children as “units” I wanted to punch the guy in the face. I have no idea if this is common within large institutions, but my experience with this one individual really made me think about how aid is developed, delivered, and measured.

The issues are complex and interwined. I personally find Bill’s approach refreshing and cheeky.

“Few men are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of their society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world that yields most painfully to change.”
Robert F. Kennedy

So Michael..I guess that would make you a what? A cannibalistic vulture/vampire? So white westerners feed on ‘locals’ and you in turn feed on the..white westerners.

As an “independent global citizen” (eyes rolling) pray tell – eventually you will seek employment – hope it won’t be for an aid org.

Sorry to say but your current detached status does not make you one of the blokes Kennedy talks about. I wouldn’t put Bill into that category either – he’s an academic – and he’s hardly being ostracized. Seems he’s quite enjoying all this rather than feeling in any way crucified. Someone in a past post once referred to him as a parasite….maybe that goes a bit far – but an interesting analogy indeed!

Christine,
With a little research you could have leaned something about me before you made such statements. There is a link provided a link to my blog so that you could find me on Facebook and LinkedIn.

My travels to Africa are to visit my friends. Some of then happen to be involved in some admirable efforts to improve the lives of the underprivileged and vulnerable in their own communities.

I try to share my experiences without resorting to personal insults. I’m a 43 year old while American male that has worked for 20+ years in corporate America implementing operational strategies to improve efficiency and reduce waste. My job has often been to eliminate the need for my job. Isn’t that what the mission of every aid and relief worker shoudl be?

The quote was meant to be inspirational. It was not intended to describe myself or Bill.

You may continue the insults. I am a big boy. I can defend myself and not be discouraged.

I’d like to make explicit an idea which I think is implicit in some of the comments, but which hasn’t been spelled out as such: the audience for your blog isn’t only (nor should it be) the echo chamber. It’s the critical thinking and, yes, in part, the tone which makes it interesting to a broader audience. And there’s no telling who’s out there and what impact it will have on donors, policy-makers, future aid-workers, or even casual bystanders. It’s extremely cynical to suggest that coddling people already doing development work is somehow necessary. Are they really so thin-skinned that a few hard questions are going to somehow discourage them into being less effective than they already are? Are they going to pick up their marbles and go home? Would this really be a loss? Criticism from these quarters should be taken precisely as an index that your voice is having an effect. Those who are offended by it aren’t likely to be the agents of change in the first place, but those who replace them may be.

The implication that individuals aren’t responsible for the corruption of the organizations they’re a part of is an extremely dangerous one. There was a really great post on the blog Interfluidity recently about this very issue, called In Defense of Incivility:

http://www.interfluidity.com/v2/560.html

We all make compromises in our daily lives. It’s the only way to negotiate our way through this world. But it’s no one else’s responsibility to help us sleep at night. When it comes to matters of conscience, criticizing the critics for incivility is worse than silently maintaining the status quo.

Whatever. Please keep the withering satire coming. These agencies and their decision makers deserve every bit of it, and more.

What an obscene, tragic waste 90% of these efforts have been, and are already doomed to continue to be. If anything, additional critical voices are needed, to counteract the laughable self-aggrandizement coming from the aid world.

As one of the lone (or very few) critical voices, you’ll always have your detractors; To make one’s “career” in the burgeoning and competitive aid industry, one first needs to become a loyal foot soldier within it, where snark is only acceptable around insiders. First and foremost the goal must be to defend against legitimate criticism, and keep one’s project funding, thereby driving the knife in deeper to these aching, broken countries and communities. (But that’s OK, just after the next big project/posting/boondoggle, one intends to really reform the bad things about Aid™ from within, right? … right? Riiiiiight.)

Your writing is hardly useless. These orgs need their feet held to the fire, probably to the point of having their legs roasted right off. So much of Aid™ is an absolute scandal, and a thousand Easterly clones would not be able to cast the amount of criticism and doubt that would be appropriate.

I’d like to know what aid works as well as what fails. Which organizations, if any, are doing a good job?

Each month I give money to Care, MSF, and Malaria No More. I have no idea if these donations are being productive or just being wasted. Would my money do more to reduce global poverty if I simply invested it in an emerging markets index fund? Giving readers guidance on how they can help would be helpful.

Has anyone looked at this? http://www.massivegood.org/en_US/the-project

It was just ‘unveiled’ in the Uk media today.

Apart from the whole “is aid good angle” it seems to be a pretty quick way to solicit small funds. Can’t see how it’s different from the many other charity piggy-backs that happen though (e.g. on paypal etc).

Christine wrote: Can’t claim to decide who “wins” at comments but….the fact that none of the people commenting on this blog are neither poor themselves nor at the receiving end of aid monies (well, other than salaries -

Marieme Jamme respond:

Writing behind a name called Christine is very easy Lady Gaga!:-)
I am an African woman born in Africa, philanthropist now living all over the world, lived in deep poverty and understand what is like to be poor.
Being poor is not a status or something that you ask for especially when living in Africa. You don’t have a choice. You will never know maybe in your life what is it like to be poor or hearing on the news that 20millions dollars was just given to your country and in the next hour you still count your pennies and rice or thinking that the Aid GOD will come and knock at your door.
Please don’t generalize or use languages like this on people. You don’t know who we are and what we are made of. Perhaps our Websites or Biographies don’t describe our humble and honest we are, but we know the serious issues we are talking about, we are not wannabes or pretended connoisseur of International Development World.
The fact remain , my people are dying, starving, killing each others, uneducated, raped, left behind because of AID. So please, do your research before you comment on such important blogs like this. Please- With Thanks!

With Regards
@mjamme

I read the three-way conversation between Michael, Christine and Marieme. Referring back to my earlier post, 30 years ago it is likely that Michael and Christine would have been working for the same organisation and interacting with politeness, empathy and understanding. Marieme would likely not have been present since she is an example of one of the positive changes over the past 30 years: the significant improvement in the overall quality of human capital in developing countries.

Back to Christine. She said: “the fact that none of the people commenting on this blog are neither poor themselves nor at the receiving end of aid monies”

Really? And how do you know that?

This type of intellectual howler can occur with the smartest of people and by extension with ’smart’ organisations as they get ‘dumbed down’ by interacting mainly with like-minded people or groups.

I suspect Christine that you are a smart person and hope that you receive this critique in the same positive light as you would if we were doing this over a drink.

Michael – personal insults are never constructive, so I apologize.

As with most things, credibility is often perceived based on WHO the mouthpiece is, rather than on the content of what is being said (hence men in labcoats for any toothpaste commercial). As for me, I just tend to give credibility more to criticism coming from those that have been doing aid for many years in various countries and can honestly admit their strengths and weaknesses. Trial by fire, street cred, etc.

So I tend to block out what seems to me to be righteous indignation by people that haven’t actually tried to do the work themselves. It’s just unfair to point out mistakes that you haven’t proven yourself capable of overcoming. “The good captain shows himself in the storm”, my mother says.

Do I want to be coddled, Dan? Yes But more than that….I just want to be understood.

I just have one final remark on a great post by PoorEconGradStudent.

I am also poor (I hope only temporarily again though); also, for the record, I have worked in and with aid a great part of my career as well, in and with a government another part of my career too.

Yet probably my biggest observation during these years, relates directly with the post from the ‘poor grad student’. I humbly claim that probably the last word in the sentence: “…the failure of aid to impact growth.” could potentially be replaced by either one or a combination of the following options:

a) quality of life
b) poverty
c) inequality
d) opportunities
e) good jobs (with benefits and good pay)

We all know that growth does not really “trickle down” as it should, or as some claim, and in my humble opinion, the pursue of this ultimate universal goal of “growth” is usually combined (not to say highly correlated, and/or most probably cointegrated, and/or most probably only attained) with the pursue of “Maximisation Profits”; both of which, even though its already 2010, go in contrary to a maximisation and spread of a quality of life of all human beings. It is working its way to become like an official oxymoron, I think.

I would like to invoke now one of my favorite quotes related to the poor people that if we continue this way will always remain poor, in a slippery slope at best, precisely because growth does not trickle down; because those with the ability to let it trickle down wont let it trickle down properly as it should. A system, a model widely imposed through aid.
“A poor, undernourished person, brought up in penury, may have learned to
come to terms with half an empty stomach, seizing joy in small comforts
and desiring no more that what seems ‘realistic’. But this mental attitude does
not wipe out the fact of the person’s deprivation. Nor does imply that the
person would not value the removal of that deprivation if it were to occur.”
Amartya Sen.

They just dont care, they are not interested. Currently more than 50% of world population lives under 2 PPP dollars a day!

I don’t believe in markets, as some claim to do, I know for a fact they work! markets are not a religion, something to believe in, markets work, and of course sometimes they need to be regulated and/or intervened in for good. But still they will work! They don’t need to distortioned (this word exists? or is it distorted) or used as a tool for things ethically unacceptable. Greed and Egoism should have its limits.

An analogous example: the current US Universal Health Care struggle (the back and forth, back and forth). The system is already there, it is called medicare and medicaid, what’s the big deal? I thought that is a consequence -probably- of the fact that corporations can continue to donate to campaigns as if they were citizens …. the other day I head a joke by robin williams: he said something related to FEEDBACK, something very deep, applicable to both AID and to this US issue: it goes like this:

“congressmen/women should stop wearing ties and nice suits/dresses, and instead they should wear jackets like the racecar drivers do, with patches of logos/names of their sponsors. then we would know why they made that decision”…. Seriously that would be a great idea, like a website to have: a public free information system of all donations from whom $$ and to whom $$. The problem is that it would probably have no sponsors in the beginning I guess.