NGO's more harm than good? Or more good than harm?
- juansweetpotato
- Expatriate
- Posts: 2637
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:45 pm
- Reputation: 75
NGO's more harm than good? Or more good than harm?
Was just reading TOF and thought the debate on Sunrise was very interesting.
It seems the standard of poverty porn that Oxfam, Help the Children etc used in the past has been taken on by more than one smaller NGO.
As far as Orphanages go, they seem to be a growing business inspite of a recent UNICEF report from 2015 which advises;
Even the aid sector is now saying orphanages are not a good way to go for most orphans and that more support in the parent's or careers life is a better option as ;
As for myself, I find it very hard to know, as most of the things we have to tell whether they are doing a good job in the aid sector are never transparent. I do think that medical NGO's do a great job, especially the smaller one's where doctors use their vacations to offer surgery etc to remote rural areas in Africa for example. Unfortunately the larger medical organizations have been tarred by the CIA ( Afghanistan) so I'm not too sure about them now also.
I wonder what others feel? as it's hard to think logically without all the facts.
It seems the standard of poverty porn that Oxfam, Help the Children etc used in the past has been taken on by more than one smaller NGO.
As far as Orphanages go, they seem to be a growing business inspite of a recent UNICEF report from 2015 which advises;
http://www.unicef.org/media/media_45279.htmlIn keeping with this and the agency’s commitment to adapt to the evolving realities of the AIDS crisis, UNICEF commissioned an analysis of population household surveys across 36 countries. Designed to compare current conditions of orphans and non-orphans, the global analysis suggests we should further expand our scope, focusing less on the concept of orphanhood and more on a range of factors that render children vulnerable. These factors include the family's ownership of property, the poverty level of the household, the child’s relationship to the head of the household, and the education level of the child’s parents, if they are living.
Even the aid sector is now saying orphanages are not a good way to go for most orphans and that more support in the parent's or careers life is a better option as ;
http://www.unicef.org/media/media_45279.htmlOf the more than 132 million children classified as orphans, only 13 million have lost both parents. Evidence clearly shows that the vast majority of orphans are living with a surviving parent grandparent, or other family member. 95 per cent of all orphans are over the age of five.
As for myself, I find it very hard to know, as most of the things we have to tell whether they are doing a good job in the aid sector are never transparent. I do think that medical NGO's do a great job, especially the smaller one's where doctors use their vacations to offer surgery etc to remote rural areas in Africa for example. Unfortunately the larger medical organizations have been tarred by the CIA ( Afghanistan) so I'm not too sure about them now also.
I wonder what others feel? as it's hard to think logically without all the facts.
"Can you spare some cutter for an old man?"
-
- Expatriate
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 4:09 pm
- Reputation: 0
Re: NGO's more harm than good? Or more good than harm?
Formulating a rational reply to the question is impossible.
Some NGOs do sterling work on a thin shoestring, others are known to be deeply corrupt.
Then there is - for example - World Vision, run by religious neurotics of the nastiest kind, yet
World Vision certainly saved literally thousands, possibly tens of thousands, of Cambodian lives.
Some NGOs do sterling work on a thin shoestring, others are known to be deeply corrupt.
Then there is - for example - World Vision, run by religious neurotics of the nastiest kind, yet
World Vision certainly saved literally thousands, possibly tens of thousands, of Cambodian lives.
-
- Expatriate
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 4:09 pm
- Reputation: 0
Re: NGO's more harm than good? Or more good than harm?
Formulating a rational reply to the question is impossible.
Some NGOs do sterling work on a thin shoestring, others are known to be deeply corrupt.
Then there is - for example - World Vision, run by religious neurotics of the nastiest kind, yet
World Vision certainly saved literally thousands, possibly tens of thousands, of Cambodian lives.
Some NGOs do sterling work on a thin shoestring, others are known to be deeply corrupt.
Then there is - for example - World Vision, run by religious neurotics of the nastiest kind, yet
World Vision certainly saved literally thousands, possibly tens of thousands, of Cambodian lives.
-
- Expatriate
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 4:09 pm
- Reputation: 0
Re: NGO's more harm than good? Or more good than harm?
# APOLOGY FOR THE DOUBLE SUBMISSION: A STICKY KEYBOARD WAS RESPONSIBLE
Four excellent NGOs are funded (in very small part) by Quiz Nights at the IVY GUESTHOUSE in Siem Reap,
starting at 8.15pm every Thursday
Four excellent NGOs are funded (in very small part) by Quiz Nights at the IVY GUESTHOUSE in Siem Reap,
starting at 8.15pm every Thursday
- phuketrichard
- Expatriate
- Posts: 16884
- Joined: Wed May 14, 2014 5:17 pm
- Reputation: 5785
- Location: Atlantis
Re: NGO's more harm than good? Or more good than harm?
They also helped many many thousands after the tsunami in Thailand and Sri lanka,mammothboy2 wrote:Formulating a rational reply to the question is impossible.
Some NGOs do sterling work on a thin shoestring, others are known to be deeply corrupt.
Then there is - for example - World Vision, run by religious neurotics of the nastiest kind, yet
World Vision certainly saved literally thousands, possibly tens of thousands, of Cambodian lives.
BUT they would only assist those that were Christians, ( saw this with my own eyes here)
and they built some nice house as well and the top officials get paid well.
As above, some are good, some suck and prey on sensational news to drive donations
i didn't vote
In a nation run by swine, all pigs are upward-mobile and the rest of us are fucked until we can put our acts together: not necessarily to win, but mainly to keep from losing completely. HST
- franzjaeger
- Expatriate
- Posts: 519
- Joined: Mon May 19, 2014 8:32 am
- Reputation: 17
Re: NGO's more harm than good? Or more good than harm?
Some of them are real bad, skimming all the money as so to fly first class and stay at five star hotels, only giving a fraction to their cause.
I wouldn't have the heart and spirit to do that, as I don't have a need for luxurious comforts myself, despite having had lots of access to them in my life.
But who knows if you are introduced to that lifestyle, it'd be hard to say no, just like being a politician can make one rich on telling lies to the public all your life.
https://www.charitywatch.org/home
I wouldn't have the heart and spirit to do that, as I don't have a need for luxurious comforts myself, despite having had lots of access to them in my life.
But who knows if you are introduced to that lifestyle, it'd be hard to say no, just like being a politician can make one rich on telling lies to the public all your life.
https://www.charitywatch.org/home
- juansweetpotato
- Expatriate
- Posts: 2637
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:45 pm
- Reputation: 75
Re: NGO's more harm than good? Or more good than harm?
Interesting that you mention the Tsunami as there is a story I can relate by an English expat who benefited from the aid money in Thailand. He was telling me he was lucky and didn't suffer any damage and that his car went in for a regular service a few months after the disaster. His AC was broken along with a couple of other things. The mechanic asked him if he wanted his AC fixed and he replied that he didn't think he would have enough money for it at that time seeing as it was going to be a few hundred dollars. The mechanic said, "No worry, we'll put it down as Tsunami damage and you'll get it repaired for free. Which he did.phuketrichard wrote:They also helped many many thousands after the tsunami in Thailand and Sri lanka,mammothboy2 wrote:Formulating a rational reply to the question is impossible.
Some NGOs do sterling work on a thin shoestring, others are known to be deeply corrupt.
Then there is - for example - World Vision, run by religious neurotics of the nastiest kind, yet
World Vision certainly saved literally thousands, possibly tens of thousands, of Cambodian lives.
BUT they would only assist those that were Christians, ( saw this with my own eyes here)
and they built some nice house as well and the top officials get paid well.
As above, some are good, some suck and prey on sensational news to drive donations
i didn't vote
This contrasts greatly with fishermen I met who's boats were completely destroyed but didn't get a penny because they didn't meet the criteria for reasons that sounded all too normal .Something about certain beaches only being covered. Eg If your boat was just on the wrong edge of those designated beaches you wouldn't get anything. One local fisherman I met had just spent all his money doing his boat up for it to be smashed to pieces. He got nothing.
Also in India, I met a guy who told me "all these new fishing boats with big outboards you see were bought with tsunami money, but it never hit this beach and their old boats weren't destroyed.
I also remember the then Secretary General of the UN, Kofi Annan, talking on the BBC News about how less than one penny in a every donated relief pound goes to the actual cause, the rest apparently buzzes around the Swiss banking circuits. Too much donated money in hidden accounts?
Last edited by juansweetpotato on Wed May 25, 2016 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Can you spare some cutter for an old man?"
- juansweetpotato
- Expatriate
- Posts: 2637
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 8:45 pm
- Reputation: 75
Re: NGO's more harm than good? Or more good than harm?
That reminds me of one of my best friends in Glasgow who decided to move up from a carer to a junior manager for a local council funded project in Greenwich, Scotland. He was quite nervous at the meetings being his first job in his new role. He kept complaining to me that he was asking people for their data and input but was not getting anywhere. He was stressing out because he felt that it was his approach that was at fault.franzjaeger wrote:Some of them are real bad, skimming all the money as so to fly first class and stay at five star hotels, only giving a fraction to their cause.
I wouldn't have the heart and spirit to do that, as I don't have a need for luxurious comforts myself, despite having had lots of access to them in my life.
But who knows if you are introduced to that lifestyle, it'd be hard to say no, just like being a politician can make one rich on telling lies to the public all your life.
https://www.charitywatch.org/home
Anyhow, a few months down the line the director and assistant and a couple of others were had-up for misappropriation of funds. Apparently they were charging their holidays and extravagant lunches etc to the project. One of them even charged a return air ticket to Australia so they could see their relatives. The project was for the underprivileged kids in a low employment opportunity area. The people stealing the money from the babes' mouths so to speak, were people who had come from the same area and knew all the problems that the kids faced and the project was set up to help redress.
End result? As so often happens in these cases (there are an awful lot of them) the project was disbanded and the perpetrators of the fraud were employed on other projects elsewhere. Why? Because the people who employed them would have been shown up, so it was all brushed under the carpet.
Meanwhile, my very good-hearted mate was left an emotional wreck by the whole thing seeing as they had tried to put some of the blame onto him.
He gave up charity/ aid work altogether and bought a boat which we both enjoyed exploring the west-coast of Scotland in.
"Can you spare some cutter for an old man?"
-
- Expatriate
- Posts: 573
- Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 12:27 pm
- Reputation: 0
Re: NGO's more harm than good? Or more good than harm?
The whole "NGOs are bad rar rar rar" headless chicken routine is tiring.
Of all the many NGOs on Cambodia, there's a handful that are so bent and damaging they should close ASAP (SISHA, APLE, a few proselytizing religious ones) and maybe another handful that are now rendered useless (all the orphanage ones) but the rest are helpful and suffer from graft that is no worse than any other industry in Cambodia.
Friends Inc. has been very helpful working with the police on low profile rape and murder cases that would once have been ignored, LICAHDO is so good at chasing down bad things that they've scared the government (a good sign) and the countless rural development charities are the sole reason why some communities have any education or utilities at all.
Of all the many NGOs on Cambodia, there's a handful that are so bent and damaging they should close ASAP (SISHA, APLE, a few proselytizing religious ones) and maybe another handful that are now rendered useless (all the orphanage ones) but the rest are helpful and suffer from graft that is no worse than any other industry in Cambodia.
Friends Inc. has been very helpful working with the police on low profile rape and murder cases that would once have been ignored, LICAHDO is so good at chasing down bad things that they've scared the government (a good sign) and the countless rural development charities are the sole reason why some communities have any education or utilities at all.
Re: NGO's more harm than good? Or more good than harm?
Yes, the question is way too broad.ot mien kampf wrote:The whole "NGOs are bad rar rar rar" headless chicken routine is tiring.
Of all the many NGOs on Cambodia, there's a handful that are so bent and damaging they should close ASAP (SISHA, APLE, a few proselytizing religious ones) and maybe another handful that are now rendered useless (all the orphanage ones) but the rest are helpful and suffer from graft that is no worse than any other industry in Cambodia.
Friends Inc. has been very helpful working with the police on low profile rape and murder cases that would once have been ignored, LICAHDO is so good at chasing down bad things that they've scared the government (a good sign) and the countless rural development charities are the sole reason why some communities have any education or utilities at all.
LTO Cambodia Blog
"Kafka is 'outdone' in our country, the new fatherland of Angkor" - Norodom Sihanouk
"Kafka is 'outdone' in our country, the new fatherland of Angkor" - Norodom Sihanouk
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 2 Replies
- 3965 Views
-
Last post by samrong01
-
- 42 Replies
- 9411 Views
-
Last post by newsgatherer
-
- 21 Replies
- 5670 Views
-
Last post by rogerrabbit
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Alex, Bing [Bot], Semrush [Bot] and 692 guests