Internal Mobilization vs. External Humanitarian Aid

"generalized internationalized responsibility for fighting famine is far less valuable than having people do it themselves..." Famine Crimes, page 5.

After learning about the structure of de Waal's nonprofit organization, and having seen in countless scenarios in our readings the importance of grassroots work, it doesn't surprise me that he promotes sustainability of programs through local work. However, de Waal seems to be overly critical of humanitarian aid throughout this book.

In an ideal world, I think that need for aid would be organized at local levels and involve people in not only making the decisions for what is needed, but would involved them in the process of distribution, planning and programming. Local people would be involved in monitoring and evaluating programs and ensure that positive progress is made and lessons are learned every step of the way.

There have been countless examples that support this school of thought in the arena of HIV/AIDS thus far in our readings and classes. In Food Security and HIV and Aids in Southern Africa by Action Aid International, there is a section about local mobilization and participatory approaches and how they are critical in getting work done. People with HIV/AIDS often benefit immensely from the positive relationships that they form while working together in planning and organizing programs. One example of this is the Tiyambenawo Orphan Care group that was formed in Malawi in 2003. Three local women formed this group in response to the increasing number of HIV/AIDS related orphans in their community. The group raised all funds, planned and implemented all programs for these children. This is a great example of people getting work done through local means by self-mobilizing.

In addition to local mobilization, de Waal also mentions that it is imperative to have governmental support of programs too and that it is very important to have legal aid and protection in order for your program to be more sustainable. We have seen a slight version of this when African presidents getting tested for HIV and admit to HIV/AIDS being a problem in their country. This allows people to get involved and more local work to be done.

So these are good supporting evidence to the importance of local participation- which we already know. So why do we continue to have external aid drive in in big SUV's and hand out supplies that are not culturally sensitive and staying just long enough to have people depend on aid instead of be proactive in making their own change? Why do we continue to give aid to OVC's and then have them teased and made fun of because they are being set apart from the others and stigmatized?

Why? It is better to give aid than to give nothing, because something is better than nothing, right? I think we do what we feel we have to do. Because it is part of our moral compass to want to help. And I think because it is done out of nothing but good intentions, we simply have to continue on and make changes to the process in order to be more efficient in programming each time.


1. Food Security and HIV and Aids in Southern Africa. Action Aid International. August 2005