Localizing is really hard because of corruption. It's easier to say where all the money is going when you do the whole thing.
Is the drive to localize to improve indigenous capabilities? Or would you get more bang for the buck? Or does it produce better outcomes?
the drive to localize to improve indigenous capabilities? Or would you get more bang for the buck? Or does it produce better outcomes?
Good questions.
Have only skimmed this spefific rapport, but I'm happy that in this report they finally seem to be open to a shift in thinking about aid.
Afaik, aid has usually been actually kind of outsourced to non regional organizations. Generally 80/90% of money for the aid is used on that.
Many organizations need also to bribe, pay , convince local warlords to get there, and then the question remains,how effective the locally sourced( new) aid centre will be.
But, If you can cut the overhead and could invest like 80% of the money instead of the say, 20%, that would be a win.
Also, the current aid programs have been having negative outcomes and received critique. Basically, what I read was, that aid organisations ended up cultivating an atmosphere of extra dependence for their target groups, and or in some places the help only made the sitiuation worse, on the longer term.
Also , your valid and critical questions should always be addressed and situations will need some monitoring, so they can't cut all the overhead, and neither should they.
I'd add that local charities will know their communities far better than outside organizations. The locals will likely trust them to a much higher degree versus foreigners. As a result, there's likely to be less waste as communities will be less likely (obviously not a given) to steal/hoard from themselves versus simply taking resources from outsiders who they have no connection/relationship with.
Of course there are exceptions, particularly for those communities that have been so damaged and are so desperate that this approach isn't likely to succeed. I'm not a international aid expert though, just my two cents.
I'd add that local charities will know their communities far better than outside organizations.
As a general rule, I'd 100% agree on that. And yes, like you said, there're will always be some exceptions.
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/