Nothing gets better without international development
That’s it. That’s the post…well..almost…
The blog has been a bit quite these past few months, mainly because of a general sense of grieving, frustration and sheer disbelief of how any notion of evidence-based development has been thrown under various buses.
But one thought has stuck with me for a while now: Nothing gets better without international development, reduced funding and minimized engagement.
Reading about USAID's fire sale in the Atlantic was one of the main triggers for my new post:
One of the more surreal knock-on effects of the gutting of USAID is that the U.S. government is now holding a massive fire sale for mosquito nets, water towers, printers, iPads, chairs, generators, defibrillators, textbooks, agricultural equipment, motorbikes, mobile health clinics, and more. Until recently, these items supported the 5,000-plus foreign-aid projects that the Trump administration has now canceled.And reading a recent post on LinkedIn how “the real question isn’t “more vs. less,” but “smarter vs. blunt”” aid contributed to my urge to write this short
Yes, I also read all those other pieces about how the end of (I)NGOs is an opportunity, how country X or Y can now “step in” to continue projects USAID hastily abandoned and how IOM or WFP can do “more with less” as part of the UN80 agenda. And then there is “blended finance” and start-ups and of course more localized, de-colonized and re-powered alliances.
Some of these new or reinvigorated connections, projects or funding vehicles will soften blows, perhaps prevent fewer children from dropping out of school because there are no school meals anymore. But WHAT WILL GET BETTER?
“Now that Chemonics nearly escaped bankruptcy we can finally focus more on SDGs 3, 7 and 11” no one said ever. And with fewer P3-positions in Geneva IOM will be become more “efficient”-heck, let’s close them down completely, there is already a queue of other players who are keen to support refugees on their “safe and orderly” migration journey!
I will stop ranting.
But it seems that large parts of the international development system have embraced the notion of the car salesman who briefly advised the US government that we need some kind of “creative destruction” so we can build new, better systems.
But people’s lives don’t stop and “wait” for such a reboot (as delusional as the concept is anyway) or have time to figure out what to do now that WFP struggles with 30 or so percent budget cuts. They will go hungry tomorrow. I’m sure the local NGO has brilliant plans to continue some of the maternal health work that USAID paid for-they just must wait out the next elections in their country, a few global summits and the budget plans for 2027-2030…
So what gets better now that the aid budgets are cut, the humanitarian appeals go underfunded and many motivated people have to leave the sector?
Comments
Post a Comment