Does outside aid hurt or help Africa?

Dr. Acula

Hail Hydra
Supporter
Joined
Jul 26, 2012
Messages
25,571
Reputation
8,536
Daps
135,446
So I heard this argument many years ago made by an African economist that all this outside aid actually does more harm than good and he wishes it would stop completely. I believe the argument was that all the outside goods, money, and food undermine local markets and stifles local growth. Not to mention in many places the aid is hoarded by corrrupt government.

I never followed the argument down the rabbit hole further myself but it made sense to me at the time.

After another story lionizing some white person going to Africa along and building something with the common white savior paint, the argument came to mind again.

I know there are a lot of knowledgeable folks here so I wanted to get your thoughts.
 

BLΔCK⁂W⊙LF

All Star
Joined
Aug 12, 2017
Messages
2,339
Reputation
440
Daps
10,249
Most developed nations relied on external capital to stimulate economic expansion. The U.S. transportation system came into fruition because of foreign investment.

Given that, I don't believe outside aid hurts many African countries, rather regional instability, corrupt governing officials, and having an undereducated populace. To add, the populace that are able to obtain suitable education tend to leave the respective country for a stable life.
 

Paper Boi

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 15, 2013
Messages
73,329
Reputation
24,578
Daps
479,289
Reppin
NULL
it literally all depends on the kind of aid.

food aid is horrible for any developing nations farming unless they are in a famine/food crisis.

tied aid also isn't helpful to any developing nation as it's not real aid.


the best aid goes through some type of NGO which disperses it to a local prefecture/aid org that can disperse it more appropriately.
 

Paper Boi

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
May 15, 2013
Messages
73,329
Reputation
24,578
Daps
479,289
Reppin
NULL
it's still better than USAID. i guarantee you.

those aren't the only NGOs that exist. i also agree that large NGOs are almost as bad as USAID, but nothing is worse than USAID.
 

mbewane

Knicks: 93 til infinity
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
18,538
Reputation
3,876
Daps
52,510
Reppin
Brussels, Belgium
Most developed nations relied on external capital to stimulate economic expansion. The U.S. transportation system came into fruition because of foreign investment.

Given that, I don't believe outside aid hurts many African countries, rather regional instability, corrupt governing officials, and having an undereducated populace. To add, the populace that are able to obtain suitable education tend to leave the respective country for a stable life.

Investment is not aid.

Aid ultimately hurts the receiving countries imo long-term, even though there are a lot of positive aspects short-term to it.

1. Reinforces the status-quo of who is good and giving vs who is asking
2. Gives Western countries a moral bandage while they keep looting the continent. And puts receiving in a situation where they can't really say anything. Beggars can't be choosers.
3. Aid is a business, and a lucrative one. West in parts creates the reasons leading to the need for foreign aid, and in turn send their own there to "fix it". Oftentimes you might read Country X receives 30 million dollars, but a sizable amount of that goes into foreign experts, foreign workers and/or contracts with firms from the donor's country. Most "aid" money isn't just transferred to the receiving's country budget.
4. Economically it can set back local development, as it becomes dependent on an outside force.
5. Creates/stimulates corruption.

Aid can have very good aspects imo, infrastructure, education, health, to help in some crisis. But all in all it brings structural dependency, gears the economy in a certain way imo and masks all the money/goods coming OUT of the continent and feeding the world, often by the same who ae "helping" :yeshrug:
 

loyola llothta

☭☭☭
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
35,061
Reputation
6,991
Daps
80,022
Reppin
BaBylon
AID is horrible including these NGO's and charities. Studies already show foreign Aid do more harm than good. Its the main reason some black nations rather work with China and other investors


if your talking about investing in the locals and they program yes that would be great
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
9,457
Reputation
-559
Daps
15,338
Reppin
WestMidWest
it's easy to say aid ain't good when your country doesn't need help
The aid itself is not bad, but the conditions to securing the aid is the problem

Having outside companies setup shop is not bad as long as your government holds those companies accountable and ensure local businesses and citizens have an advantage, like China
 

TTT

All Star
Joined
Feb 9, 2013
Messages
2,249
Reputation
460
Daps
5,556
Reppin
NULL
The type of aid received was not conducive to economic growth, it's like getting a payday loan that just keeps you going. The assumption has been that it's transformative but it really isn't designed that way. The WB was set up as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, it was meant to help the Europeans with these big picture type projects of rebuilding infrastructure. Their mission changed when they became a more globalized operation because among other things they got criticized for focusing on big projects and decided to do a lot more micro intervention stuff, for example if they want to do a coal fired power plant in a developing country they will face more pushback. People get confused about how China supplanted the West but it all goes back to this aid question, the Chinese tell many Governments that they know what it's like to be an agrarian economy that lacks basic infrastructure. They are more efficient in getting acceptance because they focus on those things more than what Western aid is about. In addition, Africa is not really front and center in American foreign policy than other regions which leaves the Europeans with lots of influence. Many countries had terrible infrastructure at independence, human capital was lacking as well, the East Asians and even parts of Eastern Europe had better starting points than Africa.
 

loyola llothta

☭☭☭
Joined
Apr 17, 2014
Messages
35,061
Reputation
6,991
Daps
80,022
Reppin
BaBylon
i had thread on something like this : Here's how Africa is held (hostage) at the mercy of NGO's & donors



continues to grow rapidly in Africa and around the world. In South Africa alone, there are more than 100,000 registered non-profit organisations and in Kenya the number of NGOs grew by over 400 percent between 1997 and 2006. And for most observers, they seem to be well-intentioned actors who do a lot of good on the continent.

But NGOs also have their detractors who argue that they are receiving growing amounts of donor aid, but aren’t the most suitable actors for really improving people’s lives.

The Cases Made Against the NGO Sector

Some critics also insist that the neoliberal policies advanced by powerful international actors have limited the influence of the state and that NGOs have benefited as a result.

Neoliberalism is an approach that favours a smaller role for the state in the economic arena. Advocates believe that the market and other non-state actors provide better services than governments.

Since the 1980s, international financial institutions like the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, have forced indebted African states to reduce public expenditure. This has encouraged the flourishing of non-state actors like NGOs.

While both local and international NGOs have benefited from this move, African states have been less able to access international aid. This undermines their sovereignty and places African people at the mercy of donors.

NGOs are also criticized for their focus on technical solutions to poverty instead of the underlying issues. So, for example, an NGO might provide water tanks for the poor without addressing the power imbalances that resulted in some having water while others don’t.

Another criticism is that NGOs are more accountable to their funders than those they serve. Because they are largely dependent on funding, their projects are crafted in line with donor preferences instead of those they supposedly represent.

A final criticism relates to the fact that NGO workers tend to be foreigners or local elites. Instead of empowering local populations to organise themselves, NGOs provide employment and a sense of purpose for elites with degrees in subjects like development studies.

Can NGOs Fix Africa’s Problems?


There’s much truth to these criticisms. But does this mean that NGOs have no role to play in Africa’s struggle for poverty and injustice?

A recent collection of articles titled ‘NGOs and Social Justice in South Africa and Beyond’, which I edited, brings together the voices of NGO workers, academics and social activists to consider this question.

The contributors raise a range of interesting ideas like how radical change can still be achieved. Can profound changes be made while working within existing structures and organisations?

Firoze Manji, who has published widely on the topic of social justice, defines what freedom really means. He makes a distinction between “licensed freedoms” and “emancipatory freedoms.”

Licensed freedoms are achieved “within the system.” As such they improve lives but don’t dramatically change power dynamics. An example can be drawn from the apartheid era when activists convinced the state to make some concessions for Black South Africans.

In contrast, emancipatory freedoms are about bringing about a new order. An example would be when people manage to defeat an oppressive state entirely.

Manji argues that NGOs empower people to attain licensed, rather than emancipatory, freedoms.


Pushing for Social Change

But NGO workers might rightfully argue that it isn’t so easy to distinguish between working within the system and working against it.

When an NGO teaches people to read, for example, this new ability might empower them to challenge things they had previously accepted. Learning this new skill might enable them to act in new, more empowering ways. So the achievement of a basic skill can enable populations to achieve emancipatory freedom.

Another example is brought out by Tshepo Madlingozi who is the advocacy adviser to the Khulumani support group in South Africa.

He shows how NGOs and social movements fighting for radical change have been able to use the courts to gain small victories.

Court victories are often hollow. For example, in the Grootboom case in South Africa, Irene Grootboom won a court struggle against eviction, but ended up dying homeless eight years later.

But court struggles can draw attention to the plight of ordinary people and mobilise and unify those working towards certain radical goals. In this way, the use of “the system” — in this case the courts — can help support the struggle for emancipatory freedoms.

Ashley Westaway, manager of an education NGO and a contributor to the collection, makes a case for providing basic services and technical assistance as a means to give an organisation the credibility required to advocate for more radical, structural change.

Perhaps the correct approach may be to let go of the idea that choices within the NGO sector are limited to either maintaining the status quo or pushing for a revolution.

Perhaps, as is the case with some of the most dynamic NGOs, workers need to operate in the cracks of the current system in ways that challenge injustice and open the door to new possibilities. Other actors, such as governments and social movements, have very important roles to play, but this doesn’t mean that NGOs can’t contribute to pushing for social justice in Africa.
Source:

The Role of NGOs in Africa: Are They a Force for Good?
Source:

The Role of NGOs in Africa: Are They a Force for Good?
 
Top