Out of billions of the earth's inhabitants, many wonder how one person can change the world around them.
The third film in the Great Decisions discussion series, titled “Philanthropy and the Rise of Global Giving,” set out to discuss the recent rising trend in private donations to global causes.
The film featured Carol Adelman, the director of the Center for Global Prosperity at the Hudson Institute in Washington D.C., and Kathy Bushkin Calvin, the Executive Vice- President and Chief Operating Officer of the United Nations Foundation.
Calvin credits the progression to the thought that “people feel there’s a role for them internationally as well as domestically.”
The trend began with the worldwide response to the 2004 tsunami that devastated Indonesia and parts of Asia. The U.S. donated $13 billion, with $2 billion coming from the private sector.
“People feel that their dollars go further,” Calvin said. This generation doesn’t want to just write checks; they want to solve problems.”
After the film, Michael Niemann, a visiting associate professor of international studies, gave a brief lecture over the history of foreign aid. The concept of foreign aid as it is known today began after World War II. Countries such as Britain and France gave up control of their colonies, but decided to give financial assistance to help bolster the fledgling civilizations.
However, Niemann suggests there are reasons other than generosity for countries to give aid abroad.
“It’s a very sharp political tool,” he said. It was also a means to create a commercial bridge for companies. You get the idea that altruism isn’t the first priority, but that doesn’t mean that the people working these jobs don’t have the best of intentions.”
In the late 1970s, the United Nations Development Foundation suggested that rich countries should allocate 1 percent of their gross domestic product to foreign aid. The idea proved unpopular with many countries, though some, such as Denmark, gave 1 percent or more of their GDP until as late as the year 2000.
Between 2000 and 2007, countries worldwide donated smaller percentages of their GDP, though some countries gave more. The U.S. gave 0.1 percent of its GDP to foreign aid in 2000, and 0.16 percent in 2007. Niemann pointed out that the U.S. claims to be the largest donor of foreign aid, but “as a percentage of their economy, they are among the smallest donors.”
One U.S. private donor that has attracted controversy is Bill Gates. Gates Foundation has been criticized for investing money in companies causing the problems that their philanthropy tries to combat. Niemann says the methods in carrying out the philanthropy can exacerbate the situation.
For example, the Gates Foundation has supported Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa, which seeks to help small-scale farmers escape hunger and poverty. AGRA intervenes by bringing largely westernized farming techniques and crops to Africa, even though such techniques and crops may not be the optimal plan for African climates and cultures.
Niemann thinks that this is missing the point.
“Hunger and poverty in Africa is not a lack of food,” he said. It’s a lack of means to purchase foodThey’re saying ‘you don’t know what’s good for you, but we sure do.’ It’s not so much racist, but it’s definitely paternalistic.”
Niemann isn’t sure private philanthropy is the solution to the situation, but thinks a larger reevaluation is needed.
“Wouldn’t it help to ask why these people are poor in the first place?” he asked.
The film and discussion series, sponsored by KSKQ Radio, the Multicultural Association of Southern Oregon and SOU Students For Truth, addresses issues of U.S. Foreign Policy.
The last film of the term, titled “Blacklisting the Enemy,” will be shown Nov. 25 at 7 p.m. in the Meese Auditorium in the CVA.