The White Man's Grow Summary
White Man’s Burden
William Easterly points out in his book why international aids has failed to date because agencies involved in it plans to tackle large problems at small scale , such as total poverty eradication and food to all mouth. Later these same ideals become policies of World Bank, IMF and UNSECO. Easterly brings out a vital point that these policies are meant keeping the perception of rich not the one who desperately needs it.
Easterly makes a division of world into two categories “Planners and searchers” Planners are the in charge of the funds but problem arises when these planners fail to execute their objective. Planners have always good intentions but not enough motivation …show more content…
to achieve the goal accompanied low accountability which results in failure of the mission. Planners are the one who decides what recipients get but they never get the feedback from recipients will really want. Due to bad accountability in countries with bad governance, funds get into an endless pit and later sourced to Swiss banks and all sorts of back income. These government officials are also try to sabotage investments and other direct business to country to keep the funds for Aid running so that they can fill in their coffers.
Whereas, Easterly applauds the “Searchers” as they tend to find out what actually works on ground realities and also take responsibility for their actions. Searchers understand the needs at the roots and they adapt with locals. Planners fail because they are not in touch with the ground realities and they keep working in same fashion even if the mission is failing for years. Their work is conducted without any independent work evaluations mechanism.
To make aid programs much more successful, we need to empower searchers with funds and resources as they understand the pulse of poor and the immediate needs at the ground. One of the great examples given by Easterly is distribution of insecticide and bed nets for prevention of malaria in Malawi. A non-profit origination called Population services international based in U.S has developed this program which pays for itself. These nets are sold to mothers through antenatal clinics in rural areas at a cost of 50 cents. The nurses who sell them receives an small incentives of 9 cents per sale and this tangible incentives keep them motivated to keep nets in stocks and influence other mothers to buy it. Rich Malawians are sold these nets at the price of 5 USD to subsidize 50 cents (bed net) programme. This model has worked effectively rather than just giving away the nets. Those who have bought the nets have used it and it is found that 70 % of those who received it free did not bother to use it.
In his writing Sachs presents to a viable and practical plan to end global poverty.
One of his goals is nation building with investments from richest countries. Sachs believes that once a nation’s infrastructure built poverty will vanish too. Though Sachs has some practical options to eradicate poverty but they tend to be a short term plan rather than long term. His work leaves out a void for long term efforts and sustainability. One of the pitfalls in his writings is the inability to adapt with needs. Sachs process uses a source of poor information which cannot identify the true needs. Sachs argues that there a huge lack of funds to deal with all poverty related problems. Sachs contends that more the money is generated with his process the more poverty could be eradicated. Sachs and Easterly advocates about changing the policies of funding in IMF and World Bank. . Escobar had similar views; he argued that funds must be injected into local INGOs but through top …show more content…
down.
Both Sachs and Easterly do not see eye to eye when it comes to implantation of process. When we compare Sachs and Easterly, we see that Sachs process incorporate more of a relief efforts and Easterly prime focus is aid from development standpoint. Easterly and Escobar both advocates the need searchers and work at ground root for development. Sachs, Escobar and Easterly are not proponents of ending poverty via the cookie cutter approach.
From my point of view I see that Easterly and Escobar are teamed up against Sachs who believes that only way to end this poverty is from top down, larger nations giving aid to improvised nations.
To some degree it seems that Sachs blames the impoverished countries for their plight. Sachs argues that there is a need of “BIG PUSH” in terms of financial capital as aid to end global poverty but these concepts are similar to the failures of economic development in the 50s and 60s. Sachs believes that poverty could end by 2025 but he included extenuating factors which might hamper the progress. Situations like dysfunctional government, war, natural disaster, people’s inability to use the aid effectively and wide spread disease. Rather on the other hand Easterly feels the best way to tackle huge influx of money is to take piecemeal approach rather than large-scale planning exercise presented by
Sachs.
Easterly feels implementing solutions at small scale but keeping the big picture in mind is a better approach. When we put ultimate goals of Sachs, Easterly and Escobar they all have the same end result but with different approaches. Escobar and Easterly wants aid donors to acknowledge the providing of solutions at the ground level by identifying a running or current existing local programs that have or are working and provide support rather than reinventing the wheel. On the other hand Sachs almost requires that you the recipient of aid are on board with the Millennium Development Goals in order to get any type of aid. Sachs model also wants to influence the decisions of the INGOs based on the perception of the need from the top down.
I believe Easterly and Escobar are on the same page in most respects. I think though Easterly and Sachs ways are different but their outcome would be close enough. It could be said in other way where two people travelled two different roads to get to a final destination. I would also like to go ahead and say that if their work are incorporated together, it may bring the true essence of aid and development to underdeveloped countries.
Reference / Work Cited
Author: William Easterly, The White Man’s Burden. Penquin Books , 2006
Author : Jeffrey Sachs, The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time, Penguin Press: New York, 2005.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/nov/25/foreign-aid-scoundrels/?pagination=false
William Easterly points out in his book why international aids has failed to date because agencies involved in it plans to tackle large problems at small scale , such as total poverty eradication and food to all mouth. Later these same ideals become policies of World Bank, IMF and UNSECO. Easterly brings out a vital point that these policies are meant keeping the perception of rich not the one who desperately needs it.
Easterly makes a division of world into two categories “Planners and searchers” Planners are the in charge of the funds but problem arises when these planners fail to execute their objective. Planners have always good intentions but not enough motivation …show more content…
to achieve the goal accompanied low accountability which results in failure of the mission. Planners are the one who decides what recipients get but they never get the feedback from recipients will really want. Due to bad accountability in countries with bad governance, funds get into an endless pit and later sourced to Swiss banks and all sorts of back income. These government officials are also try to sabotage investments and other direct business to country to keep the funds for Aid running so that they can fill in their coffers.
Whereas, Easterly applauds the “Searchers” as they tend to find out what actually works on ground realities and also take responsibility for their actions. Searchers understand the needs at the roots and they adapt with locals. Planners fail because they are not in touch with the ground realities and they keep working in same fashion even if the mission is failing for years. Their work is conducted without any independent work evaluations mechanism.
To make aid programs much more successful, we need to empower searchers with funds and resources as they understand the pulse of poor and the immediate needs at the ground. One of the great examples given by Easterly is distribution of insecticide and bed nets for prevention of malaria in Malawi. A non-profit origination called Population services international based in U.S has developed this program which pays for itself. These nets are sold to mothers through antenatal clinics in rural areas at a cost of 50 cents. The nurses who sell them receives an small incentives of 9 cents per sale and this tangible incentives keep them motivated to keep nets in stocks and influence other mothers to buy it. Rich Malawians are sold these nets at the price of 5 USD to subsidize 50 cents (bed net) programme. This model has worked effectively rather than just giving away the nets. Those who have bought the nets have used it and it is found that 70 % of those who received it free did not bother to use it.
In his writing Sachs presents to a viable and practical plan to end global poverty.
One of his goals is nation building with investments from richest countries. Sachs believes that once a nation’s infrastructure built poverty will vanish too. Though Sachs has some practical options to eradicate poverty but they tend to be a short term plan rather than long term. His work leaves out a void for long term efforts and sustainability. One of the pitfalls in his writings is the inability to adapt with needs. Sachs process uses a source of poor information which cannot identify the true needs. Sachs argues that there a huge lack of funds to deal with all poverty related problems. Sachs contends that more the money is generated with his process the more poverty could be eradicated. Sachs and Easterly advocates about changing the policies of funding in IMF and World Bank. . Escobar had similar views; he argued that funds must be injected into local INGOs but through top …show more content…
down.
Both Sachs and Easterly do not see eye to eye when it comes to implantation of process. When we compare Sachs and Easterly, we see that Sachs process incorporate more of a relief efforts and Easterly prime focus is aid from development standpoint. Easterly and Escobar both advocates the need searchers and work at ground root for development. Sachs, Escobar and Easterly are not proponents of ending poverty via the cookie cutter approach.
From my point of view I see that Easterly and Escobar are teamed up against Sachs who believes that only way to end this poverty is from top down, larger nations giving aid to improvised nations.
To some degree it seems that Sachs blames the impoverished countries for their plight. Sachs argues that there is a need of “BIG PUSH” in terms of financial capital as aid to end global poverty but these concepts are similar to the failures of economic development in the 50s and 60s. Sachs believes that poverty could end by 2025 but he included extenuating factors which might hamper the progress. Situations like dysfunctional government, war, natural disaster, people’s inability to use the aid effectively and wide spread disease. Rather on the other hand Easterly feels the best way to tackle huge influx of money is to take piecemeal approach rather than large-scale planning exercise presented by
Sachs.
Easterly feels implementing solutions at small scale but keeping the big picture in mind is a better approach. When we put ultimate goals of Sachs, Easterly and Escobar they all have the same end result but with different approaches. Escobar and Easterly wants aid donors to acknowledge the providing of solutions at the ground level by identifying a running or current existing local programs that have or are working and provide support rather than reinventing the wheel. On the other hand Sachs almost requires that you the recipient of aid are on board with the Millennium Development Goals in order to get any type of aid. Sachs model also wants to influence the decisions of the INGOs based on the perception of the need from the top down.
I believe Easterly and Escobar are on the same page in most respects. I think though Easterly and Sachs ways are different but their outcome would be close enough. It could be said in other way where two people travelled two different roads to get to a final destination. I would also like to go ahead and say that if their work are incorporated together, it may bring the true essence of aid and development to underdeveloped countries.
Reference / Work Cited
Author: William Easterly, The White Man’s Burden. Penquin Books , 2006
Author : Jeffrey Sachs, The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time, Penguin Press: New York, 2005.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/nov/25/foreign-aid-scoundrels/?pagination=false