The Poverty Inc. documentary discusses the problems with current and historic approaches to global aid from the perspectives of experts and citizens of countries which are the recipients of the aid. The current aid strategy’s ineffectiveness is easily traced back to colonialism and although global aid often comes from good intentions, the result is often oppressive in that it stifles innovation and is most profitable for the country supplying the aid.
National vs Personal Poverty
To understand the Poverty Inc. documentary, it is important to distinguish between the poverty of a country and personal poverty. On a global development scale, poverty of a country is addressed by outside sources largely by attempting to build industry, while personal poverty is largely addressed by supplying for people’s basic needs. The private companies that attempt to supply aid discussed in Poverty Inc. tend to be focused on personal poverty, while international organizations and other countries are focused on poverty of a country in the documentary. Both of these solutions have the large and unintended consequence of stifling, rather than aiding, development. Building industry in countries often means global corporations take over the economic markets in the country, and much of the profits funnel away to richer countries. Supplying for people’s basic needs means the potential for a person to start a business is drastically limited because when the same goods are available for free, it is difficult to sell those goods for a profit. In these ways, countries and corporations supplying aid are profiting by keeping poorer countries from developing.
Locals are the Best People to Develop their Own Community
One theme visited throughout the documentary is the idea that people in the developing countries know them best and therefore are the correct ones to develop them. Much of the aid supplied throughout history has been supplied with the supposition that countries developing now must develop in the same way that Europe and the United States developed centuries ago. We cannot make a second Industrial Revolution happen for these countries, and development cannot occur in the same way with a completely different global market. The most optimistic of theories surrounding development suggest that removing strings from the aid supplied to countries and working on development from the ground up will be effective in helping countries to develop. These theories suppose that by removing barriers to entry to the global markets and not forcing countries to Westernize, development can and will happen. The most pessimistic of theories surrounding development is that some countries are rich as a result of others being poor, and it is impossible for countries to develop without other countries moving backwards in their development. The evidence for this idea comes from the exploitation of poor countries that still exists, particularly within the poverty industry that is discussed within Poverty Inc.
Current Development as a Product of History
Regardless of what theory one agrees with, the roots of the current development approach clearly come from colonialism and neo-colonialism. There is still this lingering idea that developing countries “need us in order to survive.” Parents tell their children at the dinner table that there are starving children in Africa and we should be grateful because they are unable to feed themselves. This is very reminiscent of the “white mans burden” and other antiquated ideas that paint people of different cultures as uncivilized barbarians that need help from the West to be able to survive. This could not be further from the truth. Much of development theory supports that the number one driving forces in development are human rights for citizens and independence from foreign control. People in the Poverty Inc documentary discuss how they have seen that foreign aid directly opposes these two goals by supporting dictators and providing caveats to any aid supplied.
Inaccessibility of Entrepreneurial Success
Perhaps the largest barrier to development caused by foreign aid is the lack of space for productive entrepreneurship. The video discusses how Toms shoes supplied free shoes to children in need, but by supplying these free shoes, it meant that someone who would have before been selling shoes went out of business. Because this means a lost stream of income, they then become dependent on aid when they otherwise would not have been, and a vicious cycle is created that only supports the idea that what aid organizations are doing is helping. Poverty Inc also addressed that it is very difficult to have a medium sized business in impoverished countries. While some companies currently supply microloans and global organizations can create large assets in these countries, there is no ability for people to grow from a small to a medium sized business because they lack property rights and therefore have no guaranteed assets to use as collateral. This leads to the large global businesses entirely taking over and leaving little space for local businesses to make any real profit. These global businesses market themselves as “creating jobs” and overall improving the economy of the region, but really most of the profits are sent back overseas to the wealthier countries that run the companies and use outsourced labor to cut costs.
Not All Aid is Bad
It is certainly a misstep to say that aid in general is bad. However, the current way in which aid is provided is exploitative and serves only to keep countries from developing. Aid should be limited to developing means of sustainable productivity for a country (done by the people within the country themselves) and times of crisis where additional support is needed for a very limited window of time. People going to an island to help rebuild homes after a hurricane when construction companies are overworked is not a bad thing, but people going to build homes for people for free and consequently putting that construction company out of business stifles development rather than helping it. In order to make aid more effective, the strings attached to aid packages need to be removed, the barriers to impoverished countries entering the global market need to be lifted, and universal freebies need to stop being given. I am completely on board with charitable donations to those that are in a time of need, but if only charitable donations are being given and no skills to work oneself out of poverty are developed, an endless cycle of dependence is created and there will never be any growth.
Michael Matheson Miller, Acton Institute, & ColdWater Media Inc. (Producers), & Michael, M. M. (Director). (2014). Poverty, Inc. [Video/DVD] Ro*Co Films. Retrieved from https://video.alexanderstreet.com/watch/poverty-inc
