The problem with being funded by foreigners has ben identified by Indian academics and scholars who realise that think tanks (and NGOs more generally) pay more attention to international narratives than local ones. But this is also a problem of accountability. The model is not dissimilar as the model first adopted by think tanks in the US in the early 1920s. In the late 1800s think tanks had been associations of business people, individuals, academics, etc. concerned on local issues. So, in a way funding and agency were with the citizens. When the large foundations (Kellogg, Ford, etc.) got involved they allowed think tanks to act independently of citizens.

What we find in Africa (in other places too, but here it is worst) is that these NGOs USE citizens to pursue agendas set in London, Brussels, Washington, etc. But lets not be too romantic, the big elephant in the room is that these organisations (and many in the North) are staffed by people whose capacities are simply not even the minimum necessary to plan and implement very simple projects. Change needs to start by reforming the education system and patience.. a lot more patience (http://wp.me/pYCOD-iZ)

In my view, aid to NGOs would be better used in leveraging domestic funds for civil society in general.

A good model to consider is German political foundations’ support to political parties and think tanks. Donors should support political debate rather than policy change (policy change at all costs -even if this undermines democracy).

All the speakers coincide: better funded than parties, better staffed -but not by Malawians, by foreigners. This is dangerous. Driven by the evidence based policy mantra international ‘aid’ agents are brushing politics and ideology aside creating technocracies at the expense of democracy.

Somewhere within these NGOs are ‘think tanks’ or NGOs that claim to do research or conduct analysis to develop their advocacy arguments -when in fact, much of what they advocate for also comes from the outside.

It is quite a shame that this is just a radio potcast. DFID and others (via NGOs and think tanks and consultancies) are depoliticising policy in developing countries -even when the policies proposed are highly political in the UK (e.g. user fees, cash transfers, subsidies… etc.).

There is a coterie of people in this world who takes it as their sole duty to promote this deluded sort of idealism about culture, race, different civilizations, etc. Yes, some of these places ARE squalid. Some of them ARE dangerous. Some of them are just shockingly awful, yet you wouldn’t know that if you asked the idealists, who only report back about the ‘wonderful cultures’ of these places.

I’ve spent some time in Liberia and while not quite as bad as the Vice piece makes it out to be, it’s still pretty damn bad. It makes the poverty of India look like middle class living in Stuttgart. Did I meet charming people? Most definitely. Still, I left feeling that the only sort of person who would want to actually visit that place is precisely the sort of idealist I mentioned… The one who feels that they’re doing themselves some sort of service by immersing into 3rd world cultures. If you’re that sort of person, Libera’s your place. If you’re looking for a vacation, there are about 190 other countries on earth I’d rather visit.