Hans Rosling: The only way to stop population growth.. is to increase child survival rates.
[Loband: Object Removed -] ... even if it sounds contradictory: Increasing child survival rates will stop population growth. With thanks to GB for the link!
Read the full post...Another drought. Is the development failing?
[i-drought]
When I started working in the Horn of Africa, in the mid 90's, my first emergency was a drought operation. Between 1900 and now, the region had more than 18 famine periods. This year, we have another one. And I am sure - unless we change things drastically - there will be another drought emergency a few years from now.
As an aidworker, I always worked in emergencies. Droughts, floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, wars, were my daily work... Some of these calamities are hard to anticipate, leave alone mitigate. But other, climate change related emergencies, are. At least partially. The question is: "Are we doing enough?".
My answer is: NO. According to me, both the humanitarian community neither the donors put enough emphasize on agricultural development, which -to me- is the core of climate change mitigation for farmers in many parts of the world.
In the past year, I travelled through Kenya, Mali, Burkina Faso, Ghana and India, interviewing a dozen farmer communities on climate change. I recorded their views on the current state, their wishes, their fears, and condensed it in about 30 videos (the videos you can watch here, some of the stories, you can read here). The problems differed from region to region, and so do the possible solutions.
What got to me is not only the struggles of the farmers themselves, but also the social implications of the failing agriculture in many parts of the world. In Kenya, most of the men went off to work in the cities, leaving the women to farm, and to raise their families. In Burkina Faso, whole villages migrated due to repeated failing crops. In India none of the people I spoke to, saw farming as a viable way to make a living anymore. All but one family saw the future for their kids as getting a "proper" job, somewhere in a remote city. Where will that leave us, ten-twenty years from now? Farming is the basis of many developing countries. No farming, no food, as simple as that. But even more importantly, without proper targeted agricultural development, farmers will even have it harder in the years to come. Already many live on the edge of survival. It does not take much to push them over the edge. As what happens in the Horn of Africa, this year once again.
And yet, it does not take much. Locally adapted solutions make a big change. Be it a dam, constructing low walls to avoid water running off and taking the top soil with it, planting trees to avoid erosion, micro-dosing fertilizer,.... Or wider solutions in breeding crop varieties, better adapted to the changing environment.
But little is invested in agricultural development. I broke a bone before on how cutting agricultural development, is like digging our own grave. The most frustrating part, for me, is to see how the budgets for aid emergencies, like the current drought in East Africa, beats that of agricultural development in the same area, by a ton. How everyone is beating the press drums once a drought hits a region again, but the same drums kept silent for the years before that. How the press is all over the current drought, but hardly made any room to show sustainable solutions, in the past. Everyone cries foul now over the drought, but hardly anyone was interested in the same region, in the past. And still, the impact of the current drought could have been avoided. But we failed to do so. The humanitarian community failed, the press failed, the public interest failed,...
Emergency aid relief is a plaster on a wooden leg. Sure, we have to help the people dying of famine right now, but our interest will fade out once the peak of the emergency is over.
And that gets to me.
More posts about agricultural development on The Road
Wanted: humanitarians with a conscience
- About the small steps from UNICEF to NESTLE, from PEPSICO to WHO
[i-Humanitarian aid cartoon]
Within the humanitarian world, there has always been a debate about the professional profile of development or aid workers. While the world often has an image of aidworkers resembling "the long-haired hippie singing 'We are the world' with a bunch of black kids on our knees, wearing hand-knitted goat-wool socks", many of us agree that the profile of a humanitarian should be different. Rather than "Good Intentions-only" we often look for "professionals", people who can bring an aid organisation to a operational level comparable to the commercial sector.
But somewhere there is a trade-off. We can not only hire shark-like business people, "to cut our overhead and bring more aid for less money", as often this would conflict with our humanitarian mandate. Simple example: We might buy those schoolbooks at 50% of the price, but those are made in sweat shops.
Understand the dilemma?
So, the ideal profile of a humanitarian, in my book, is a "professional with a conscience".
While my ideals stand, I can only validate them up to a certain point. Beyond that, "humanitarian executives" will, more often than not, be career politicians or even mere business people...
According to an interesting article in India Today, quoted below, Ann Veneman -the ex-chief of UNICEF- might be one of those. Switching from the UN agency mandated for child nutrition, promoting breast feeding, to joining the board of Nestle.
Nestle being the very same company which has been heavily critized for its low-faith/low-ethics campaigns luring women in the developing countries into to powder milk for babies... Nestle is the very same company which has been accused by UNICEF of using commercial methods below WHO standards.
As I said, an interesting article:
The United Nations Children's Fund (Unicef) has just released a glossy report on the state of the world's children. Senior officials of the UN body made the right noises about children, the need to improve their nutritional status and so on, at media dos in several important capitals across the globe.
At a similar occasion a couple of years ago, Ann Veneman - who was Executive Director of the agency till April 2010 - had articulated Unicef's position on how exclusive breastfeeding for toddlers is critical to combat hunger and promote child survival. Post-retirement the UN official has undergone a change of mind.
She will now be on the board of a company which has been accused of subverting efforts to promote breastfeeding by flouting laws in order to market its formula foods. Yes, Veneman is joining the Board of Directors of Switzerland-based food giant - Nestle.
Veneman's transition from advocating nutrition and health to the board room of a multinational food company has been rather smooth, but has shocked health advocates all over.
It is nothing short of a coup for the food industry which is increasingly under attack for promoting unhealthy snacking and eating habits among children.
Veneman has had an 'illustrious' past.
In 2005, when she was appointed to the top post in Unicef, not everyone was comfortable because of her past connections with agrobusiness as secretary of agriculture in the Bush Administration.
"Veneman's promotion by the Bush Administration - Unicef is traditionally headed by an American - was greeted with concerns by some grassroots activists because of her good relations with big business and her limited experience in child welfare issues", medical journal The Lancet had noted in 2006.
While at the UN body, Veneman consciously emphasised the use of ready-to-use foods as a strategy to counter malnutrition.
As per her own admission made a few months before her term ended, " Unicef has significantly contributed to accelerating the use of ready-to-use therapeutic foods for treatment of acute malnutrition, with Unicef purchases of the product increasing from 100 metric tons in 2003 to over 11,000 metric tons in 2008". Veneman's appointment is part of the trend which has seen junk food makers trying to position themselves as marketers of healthy and nutritious foods.
A few years back PepsiCo appointed Derek Yach, former Executive Director of non- communicable diseases at the World Health Organisation (WHO), as its head of health and nutrition policies.
Yach frequently writes or coauthors review articles and comments in medical journals, pushing the industry point of view.
Such articles are then cited to influence policy makers.
PepsiCo got the head of cardiovascular diseases at Centre for Disease Control (CDC) - a US government arm - to head its own division on heart health. By appointing people connected with top health bodies, these companies want to portray themselves as part of the solution and not problem, and also want to influence policy making in health and nutrition.
At this rate, the day is not far off when junk food makers will position themselves as 'health and nutrition research' outfits and start dictating national health policies. (Source)
And there is loads more we can say about the positioning of junk food and junk drinks companies within the humanitarian organisations... Right? Right?
H/T to I.T. having the courage to tweet this link...
Cartoon courtesy Polyp.org and Speechless - The Book
Haiti, one year and one day later.
Wanted: Honest NGO.
[i-presidential palace Haiti]
As we passed the sad anniversary of "One Year after Haiti", it is interesting to go through the stream of commemorative articles coming out...
It looks like every single humanitarian entity eagerly reported on their activities in the past year.
I am looking for one article where an NGO or humanitarian agency does an honest self-evaluation, highlighting not only what went well, but also why the relief effort sucked and what THEY could do better.
Give me one article. One honest NGO. It will foster my hope that honesty in the humanitarian world has not completely disappeared.
Picture courtesy Bahamas Local
Haiti: The complexity of aid
..Looking at different sides of the need for aid and the effects of aid..
Video discovered via Global Envision
How to make shit smell good
[i-aid versus bullshit]
Once upon a time, a red box was delivered to a large aid agency. The courier was a bit confused because of the lack of a clear addressee. It only had the street and the city on it. But as it bore the logo from a big donor to the aid community, he delivered it at the agency's front gate.
After a while, it ended up on the desk of the "Director Donor Relations, Press Relations and other Public Stuff". He was a bit surprised. "Hmmm.. a big red box, what do we do with this. Can't throw it away as it apparently came from a donor", he thought as his trained marketing mind started on a roll. "And red... hmm.. Communism.. Not much I can do with that. But wait. Wait a second...".
He immediately called in his whole team and presented The Box: "This green box here, will be the center of our new fundraiser and awareness efforts..", he started. Immediately some eyebrows were raised, but as trained PR professionals, nobody said a thing: If it was to be a green box, green it would be. Even if everyone knew it was red, and wondered "WTF ?". The trick was to sit, look, but not see. Have your mind wonder off somewhere else. Nod when everyone else is nodding, smile when everyone else was smiling... That is the trick of a PR professional.
The PR team immediately went to work. Took pictures of the box. Photoshopped it until it was green. They pasted their agency's CEO (who had not been in the office for two years and moved off to the Bahamas, but nobody was to know) standing next to the green box. Several well known actresses and actors, which are always part of their PR conglomerate, were also photoshopped in it.
The "PR content" team had a bigger challenge... "What can we tell about a red, euh, a green box?", they brainstormed. "It is green. Which is good. Green is good. Green is in. Green is Eco-stuff. It is a box.... represents mystery,... like development is a mystery. No, wrong, like.. Many poor's needs are a mystery.. Better. Like.. euh, many problems in the developing world are a mystery. Good. Think further. Green. Islam.. Good. Green is Islam, but only Islam knows that... Will not piss of the Americans which will think of Eco stuff. What more..? "Empty the box"... no "Join the box".. Better... "Join the Box". "Wrap the world in green paper of change"... Work on that.. Mmm.., "Green Trap, Change Wrap", no. More."The Green Wrap" Right... Green, the colour of change. Al will like it. The Iranian people will too. Shit, for all we know, the Taliban might like it!" It went on for hours. It was clear all PR staff, who were seconded for three months from big PR companies, as a collective tax writeoff, knew their marketing stuff.
Then it went to the operations department, the finance department, the risk analysis department (who indicated that green was also the colour of the election protests in Iran, but all wiped it off the table as "nobody cared about that Iran shit anymore"), the IT department (who distributed green mousepads) and even the catering people (who wore green caps for two months). The security department suggested to scan to box as nobody had opened it. And there was an awkward smell coming from it.. But they got orders from "up above" to keep their hands off.
In short, it took less than two months to prepare the campaign, and to present it at the next "General Government Meeting". They got the nod from the Americans and the Brits, which was good enough to roll out the campaign globally. None of the other donors were important anyway.
Neither the US nor UK knew what it was all about trusted the organisation to know what they were doing. It was also as a trouble-free way to empty their budget before the year's end. Otherwise questions were asked. And by nodding, they stepped up as a major donor, so they'd see their logo on all PR material. "Donation from the American and British People". Solid deal, man. Solid deal..
Some rumour that the US and UK representative to the General Government Meeting had been drinking the night before, and were actually dozing off. Which would explain their enthusiastic nodding at the proposal. But that is just a rumour of course.
The Green Box was put in a huge display case, stuck on a massive rotating pole with flickering lights and all, in front of the agencies' office. It even dwarfed the McDonald's sign right next to it. McDonald being one of the main private donors to the agency, did protest every so slightly. But they were quickly reminded that Burger King was just around the corner and waiting... Indeed, the main private donors: McDonald's, Bayer, Shell and Bureau for the Promotion of Tourism in West-Agriculturia (which later turned out to be a tax outlet for the Albanese Mafia, but that is another story), all supported the idea and made small green boxes for change collection in their offices and outlets. "Change for Green".
In one of the roll-out meetings that followed, some staff did question the content of the Green Box. One even opposed the idea, but the cold stares she got, had her sit down and be quiet. After all, nobody wants to be a lone tree. They catch a lot of wind. And she had only a temporary employment contract, so 'not extended due to funding limitations' was easy.
Once this initial opposition was dealt with, all went very fast. Everyone was enthusiastic. Directors pitched in their support, as they knew the Green Box campaign had a huge budget. They all wanted a piece of the pie. Staff stepped up to be the "Champion of the Green Box". There was a competition to collect the most money from family. Kids had a worldwide "Green Box" painting competition, you name it,...
The press had a ball. They pitched everything from "Turning Development Green", "The Green movement: turning evolution into revolution". "The Largest Green Aid Campaign Ever"... Millions, Billions, it did not matter, figures were thrown. Everyone loved the hype. I mean apart from Putin having the flu and the Americans invading North Korea, it was a slow news month.
Even Foxnews feature something. "Large Green box, center to Obama Tax Evasion" in which they proved through extensive investigative journalism, that the box was sent straight from Obama's office, and contained money left over from his election campaign...
Three years later, the Green Box campaign was declared a success. It went in the books as a school example how to to strategize for a good fundraiser, how to motivate staff for your causes, how to rally donor support.
In the next government meeting, the UK and US reps gave an enthusiastic nod on the final evaluation report, and approved funding for the next project.
So, everyone was happy. Loads of money went around. And they even helped some poor along the way. Not many, as their 10% declared overhead cost, did not include 50% staff cost, and 20% transport cost, 10% security cost, plus the agreed 10% miscellaneous cost.
It did not matter. Everyone was happy. With the funding generated, the organisation survived another year. There were no scandals, so donors were happy. And does it not feel good to help the Poor of the World.
Oh and the box? It was delivered to the wrong address. It was supposed to go to the recycling company next door, and contained 300 dead AAA batteries.
Question to be asked:
How many green boxes exist in the aidworld? How many times are we all sitting in a meeting, enthusiastically nodding at eachother, although we all know the proposal is shit, the product is shit, the purpose is shit, but it does not feel right to ask questions or to oppose. How many times are senseless things done, because "donors want it", because politics want it, simply because the boss wants it? Do we leave enough room for critical thinking and opposition? How many times are we sucked up as part of this massive dynamic which includes all the "wins-wins", and where it is almost impossible to stand up in the stream and say "Is this really what we should be doing?". There is no reward in opposition, after all. Loser!
A Wise Friend told me not long ago, that in the Aid World failure, incompetency, "half-half" are much more common and accepted than in the Commercial World. I think I will start to believe that.
Picture slightly modified from a find on Words, Pictures, Humor
Switching off the lights
[i-People from the Haiti operation]
As you know, I try not to write too much about the work I do, in an attempt to segregate my official duties from my blog. I will make an exception for once.
When the earthquake stroke Haiti on January 12th, it not only devastated the poorest country in the Western hemisphere, but it also devastated our operations in Haiti. Our offices were destroyed. Our staff lost family and friends. Most of the country's infrastructure was affected, making it very difficult for any humanitarian aid to reach those in need.
We set up our office in the Dominican Republic to provide the needed support both for our own organisation and for the other aid agencies. We set up a logistics "pipeline" receiving aid goods, coming in via air and sea, and transported them via air and road into Haiti. We set up an airbridge ferrying in the initial response goods, and humanitarian staff into Port-au-Prince and beyond.
For the past months, I headed our operations, based in Santo Domingo. End of May, we are wrapping up the the initial emergency response phase. As the months went by, all organisations rebuilt their infrastructure, and the port, roads, warehousing capacity inside the country came back on its feet. Since a month, we have been converting our office from its initial response, to a more longer term configuration.
When I landed here on January 19, a few days after the Haiti earthquake, I found a dozen staff who arrived here before me, cramped in a small room. As the days went by, more and more people flew in, both to support our office, as well as all those on route to Haiti. At the peak, we had people working in the central office, at two ports, two airports, and two suboffices in the country. We built up the operation from scratch, growing to almost 100 staff, mobilized from countries all over the world. We had staff working in our offices who were called in from over 30 different countries. Logistics experts, food specialists, finance and administration staff, procurement people, airops officers, security officers and engineers...
We based our operations in two conference rooms of a hotel, here in Santo Domingo. No windows. The "dungeons" we called them, as they had no windows. Sunlight was a rarity in those early days. A month later, the hotel converted their "ping-pong room" near the swimming pool into a working space, with seven more offices normally used by beauty salons and travel agencies.
The first few weeks were hectic. We worked from 7 am until late at night, 7 days per week, moving cargo and people into Haiti, processing finance and procurement transactions like there was no tomorrow. Staff rotated in and out, replacing the "initial responders" with "fresh blood", again called in from all over the world. We had people working with us, who are normally based in our operations in North Korea, Malawi, Dubai, Rome, all over Central and South America and Asia. Senior experienced professionals worked side by side with staff for whom this was their emergency operation, and local recruits. We dealt with government officials, nutritional experts, security incidents, commercial companies, airport authorities, immigration staff and transporters. It was never a dull day for the -last count- over 170 different staff who worked in our Dominican operation.
Now, four months later, we are "switching off the lights". As of June 1, we have demobilized most of the international support staff, handing over the operations to the local staff we recruited, with just a few expat staff remaining. The initial response phase is over.
Organising a new office has its challenges. Making sure all operations go smooth, fast and auditable. Ensuring all the pieces of the supply chain match together. Building up a team, even with that many people coming in and out. Dealing with sudden 'emergencies': our staff in Haiti running out of food supplies, pockets of displaced people appearing along the border in need of assistance, one of our staff being shot at, to manually stamping 500,000 food distribution coupons.
But building something, a team, an operation, is fun. That is what I like. Downscaling -although an intrinsic part of any good aid operation- is more difficult. Not only ensuring all the last bits and pieces of the operation are properly closed, suppliers are paid, all contracts are well documented, etc... but the personal aspect, is often a challenge... "Switching off the lights".
It has been an interesting experience within myself. I had to downscale something I built. In the past four weeks, gradually people have gone back to the duty station they were called from. There have been many goodbyes. And I am not good at goodbye's.
We had many beautiful people working with us. Professional in their job, and really nice individuals. Some of them have worked in this operation since the beginning. And now, it is time to leave. Time to close what we have worked on. "our project", "our office", "our team".
Over the past months, I have gotten to love the people I work with. Working in any emergency creates that bond, the feeling of "us". And saying goodbye, especially to those who were here since the beginning, is not easy. Sure enough, we are all professional aidworkers. This is our job. But we are also human. We are not only saying goodbye to colleagues, but we are also saying goodbye to people who have become close friends. People who we have shared a unique experience with. People who we have shared these incredible four months with.
As we walk in this road of life, we cross many people and we create many bonds. The bond between emergency responders is unique. We hold together. Together against the challenges of time, the challenge of the enormous needs, the challenges of.. "the outside world". We live and work together, not thinking of "tomorrow", but dealing with the issues of "today".
And now, we will all go our own way. Back to France, Italy, Panama, Ivory Coast... Many of us, in thoughts. A piece of us will remain here, in Santo Domingo. Cradled in memories of those crazy nights stamping those damned coupons. Of the time where we had to get a ton of food for our own staff on the plane in three hours. Of the time where we had to get that much needed aid cargo at the border in 24 hours.
Once upon a time, we will all meet again. In another emergency. When I meet Georges next time in flood operation somewhere in Asia, or Alex in a civil war somewhere in Africa, or Henrik in a drought operation in the Caucasus, we will meet again as old friends. As if we never parted. Sharing the memories of this operation. Sharing the bond.
But for the time being, we have to go. We part. We say goodbye. Knowing there is never enough we can express at the moment when we give that final handshake: "Thank you for your help, it was a pleasure working with you", while we really wanted to say is "You know, I loved working with you. You are now part of my heart. Thank you for being part of this".
So for all of you, this is not goodbye. But "I will see you again". You are in my heart. We did well. We made a difference!
Aid: The road to hell is paved with good intentions
[i-link]
Seriously. Humanitarian aid is complex. Seriously complex. And open for ab-use, miss-use,.. and wrong-use. As an aidworker, I am standing in the midst of it all, often shaking my head in disbelief. Part of me gets cynical and sarcastic at times. Specifically when it concerns something that starts with good intentions. But then the road to hell is paved with good intentions: It is not because you mean "well", that you do "well".
Yesterday I got really cynical. I aired some of it on Twitter, suggesting a number of initiatives which I meant as sarcastic jokes, only to find out some of those stupid suggestions had actually been implemented. Seriously.
I also found fellow aidworker/blogger "Tales from the Hood" wrote about the same subject, Twitter-tagging it "#SWEDOW" - or "Stuff WE DOn't Want".
Let me just list the initiatives I meant as a joke yesterday (mostly inspired by 1millionshirts), with after-thoughts between "[ ]":
And while I was at it, I also found ways to get rid of your 1millionOldBras...
>> at this point fellow aid-fanatic @Katrinskaya intervened and pointed to her excellent post #1millionsextoys for Africa. Yeah!
Picture courtesy CordAid
War and Aid
From the viewpoint of the warriors, the logic of the humanitarian era is simple: Without violence and devastation, no aid. And the more ghastly the violence and the more complete the devastation, the more comprehensive the aid.
"War Games: The Story of Aid and War in Modern Times"
by Linda Polman
Picture courtesy Lionel Marre Read the full post...
The pipeline into Haiti
[i-the%20office]
Eight days ago, which seems a lifetime ago right now, we were meeting in Rome, with the operational group, briefing about the Haiti earthquake emergency. The initial response teams had already been deployed, and the reports we got from the ground gave us a clear view of the enormity of the catastrophy, and the size of the humanitarian response it would require.
During the meeting, we realized that the destruction of the infrastructure inside Haiti would not allow us to bring humanitarian aid straight into the country, neither by air or sea. I stressed the need to beef up the logistics and support capacity we had in the Dominican Republic, Haiti's neighbour. While we were discussing the possibilities, my boss bent over to me, and asked: "Would you want to run that part of the operation". And I said "Yes".
That was at 10 am. Two hours later, senior management had agreed, and I got my "marching instructions": set up the logistics and support "pipeline" in the Dominican Republic. I asked to leave on Tuesday, so I had time to define what I would need in terms of people and structure, and to prepare myself.
On the Tuesday, I flew into Santo Domingo, the capital. As I walked into the office, I saw 30 people cramped into a space, suitable for maybe 10 people. Staff was working with 6 at a table of one.
The same day, we negotiate office and accommodation space at a local hotel, and the next day, we moved. Staff kept on flying in, either to work out of our "Dominican hub" or in transit to Haiti. This evening, I checked, and we already had 67 rooms occupied in the hotel, meaning 67 people were already working in our Santo Domingo office, excluding the logistics hubs we are currently establishing in Barahona and Jimani.
Our operation is supporting the food "pipeline" into Haiti, transporting 40 trucks of food per day, soon to be increased to 60 trucks per day. We also have two passenger planes and one cargo plane which fly into Haiti twice or three times. We don't only transport food, but also ferry people and humanitarian aid into Haiti for other agencies. And it is only the beginning.
Since I landed, the operation has rapidly increased in size, and will continue to do so. Days and nights fade into one. I concentrated in organising the office structure, and creating an environment where my staff could work. We are working out of two converted conference rooms in the hotel, squatting with our laptops at conference tables with admin staff, procurement people, the air operations officers and the logistics group. As I walk around the rooms, I overhear conversations about flight and cargo bookings, people negotiating warehouse space, deals being made about jet fuel, travel bookings, offloading planes, security clearances, the purchasing of drinking water, and situation reports. It is a positive, 'we-can' atmosphere. I can see people smile, and enjoy the work the do. This is the stuff they like, the core of a humanitarian aid spirit.
And I have great staff. They know their work, I don't have to do much, other than a bit of guidance here and there, and for the rest, just be the "oil in the machinery". Each group, be it the logisticians, air ops people, procurement staff, or the travel people, all know what to do and how to do it. I see small teams working on the deployment of the helicopters, the flight schedule of the next days, the increase of our trucking capacity or simply putting together the contact list of those operating in the country. I am proud of them.
And inbetween all of it, Jayne stands up and shouts "Quiet everyone, who has bloodtype B+"? One of our staff member in Haiti dug his two children out of the rubble of what once was his house, and we evacuated them into Santo Domingo. One of the children was going into shock and the hospital lacked B+ blood. A staff member raised her hands, and she was driven to the bloodbank. Meanwhile the hotel staff started an SMS campaign to find more B+ blood and in one hour came up with a list of 8 donors. The child was saved. For now that is, he remains in critical condition.
Meanwhile we continue to get 'shopping lists' from our people on the ground in Haiti. The need instant coffee, sun screen, water, toilet paper... I admire them. In between the trauma of having experienced the quake, they continue to operate for 18 hours a day. With a complete lack of any basic comfort. Living and working in temporary tents. I think of them, as I am sitting in my comfortable hotel room, one hour's flight away. I wish them well. They have a daunting task ahead of them. I wished they could see how dedicated we are to serve them, and their work. We, our office, is committed to keep "the pipeline" going. The virtual flow of humanitarian aid, and survival assets.
We are committed.