A purpose for my rambling

I’ve been struggling to write an entry for this blog for a number of reasons, most prominently: I spend many hours on my laptop each day writing out reports, proposals, schedules, etc. and at the end of the day I hate to even look at the thing. But today is Saturday, so I decided that before I do any other work, I’d write something first. My other problem is that my inspiration these days is to question rather than explain. Yet, me asking a series of questions about Haiti in this blog may not make for very interesting reading (and anyways, we may very likely share the same curiosities). And a final reason for my writer’s block: I’ve switched agencies. I’m no longer with a medium-sized non-governmental organization. In fact, I’m no longer with an NGO strictly speaking (perhaps that gives it away?). I can’t say whom I work with because then I would be severely limited in what I can and cannot speak about. But, think of one of the largest, most well recognized symbols in humanitarian aid and you’ve probably got it right.

My job hasn’t changed very much; I’m still running a transitional shelter program. But, though my responsibilities have grown and become more complex, I’m tempted, at times, to see my work as slightly easier than before. This is because in medium sized agencies (and certainly small-sized agencies) you often have to do a bit of everything—logistics, finance, and administration, in addition to your programming role. In this way its kind of like running your own business—you may not be trained in HR (for example), yet you find yourself doing it. Working for a big agency means those resources are covered by people trained in them. So, you’re able to concentrate on your role.

In terms of the nature (quantity and quality) of work, the dichotomy more or less holds true: Large agencies reach hundreds of thousands of people with systematic, well-designed, well-implemented programs. Yet, there are a host of criticisms that can be applied. For example, some lament that big aid programs are comprised of inflexible interventions that are unresponsive to the rapidly changing context on the ground. And conversely, though it is overly simplistic it is not altogether incorrect, to say that small agencies are the opposite: Small agencies have a smaller gap between the context on the ground and the operational strategists. For this reason they can respond quickly to changes, and innovate more easily. But, due to economies of scale, their programs only reach a few thousand people—plus, their implementation may be inconsistent, their professional capacity weak, and their coordination spotty. Of course, coordination is critical, and when you have a hundred and one small agencies all with their pet ideals and agendas, it becomes nearly impossible.

This is why I’m always left shaking my head when the media and cyberspace pundits are critical of the ‘the humanitarian response’ in this emergency or that. Their ignorance is that they write of the response in the singular, rather than plural. A multi-dimensional crisis full of a complex network of actors is criticized as though it were a single, distinct narrative, with one protagonist—the humanitarian community—and one antagonist—the earthquake. This perspective, however, is so far from reality that the resulting discussion is worthless.

In order to have a proper discussion regarding the merits of the earthquake response in Haiti to date it is necessary to first consider each variable in its own accord: 1. The composition of the humanitarian community; 2. The composition of the Haitian leadership; 3. The composition of Haitian society (including the dirty words ‘culture’ and ‘religion’); and 4. The effect of the composition of international trade and foreign policy on all three.

So, viola! There you have the purpose of this blog: to explore each of these in-depth and hopefully learn something about life along the way. And to be very honest, that’s really why I enjoy aidwork. For me, it’s just as much about helping people as it is about learning about your own culture and society, and most importantly, about yourself. And here's some lessons I've learned along the way thus far (consider them as guideposts for our future research):

1. An extremely thin line separates our manicured, ordered and privileged civilization in Canada from the seemingly chaotic and desperate ‘third’ world. Never overlook small reminders of this, such as the mountains of trash after a summer of public service strikes in Toronto, or the senseless riots that can follow a playoff hockey game in Montreal or Vancouver. (Aside: a colleague from Atlantic Canada just arrives and exclaims, “This place is a pigsty! Why is there so much garbage everywhere?” Me: “No one comes to collect it and take it away.” Reply: “That’s no excuse. People aught to have some dignity and properly deal with it and care for their environment!” Me: “Do you really believe that?” Reply: “Yes, it’s the foundation for a sustainable community.” Me: “Do you recycle all your plastics, metals, papers, and compost?” Reply: “No, we can’t. It’s not possible. Its not like in Vancouver where every home’s got individually labeled recycle bins emptied every week by the… oh.”

2. No issue or problem stands alone. A famous Haitian proverb reads: "Beyond mountains, there are mountains." Problems in life have causes from other problems in history. If you “solve” a problem superficially, you will find it waiting for you in some other form later in your journey through life. The key is to acknowledge the interconnectedness of the issues, to recognize their ancestry and to dig to their common root.

3. Ignorance and want are not explanations for poverty and vice; they are merely points of departure for further discussion. That is to say, ignorance and want require their own explanations.

4. It is incumbent of the strong to strengthen with the weak, the rich to prosper the poor, the healthy to heal the sick. This is the first moral of any civilization, and can be traced all the way back to our earliest metaphor: the story of Cain and Abel.

So, there you have it. But, don't go calling me out when I stray off-topic to tell you about Haitian beer and beautiful beaches (among other things...). All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.

PS - I lament the current state of international development academia, with its make-poverty-history fix of money and methods. Too much emphasis on economics and political science when all social problems, though crafted significantly by economics and politics, ultimately lead us back to culture. More anthropology please.