I am sure that I am not the first to make this statement, but was motivated by an email from BFF and WhyDev co-founder Weh Yeoh, who shared this passage below. It was written by Owen Barder recently, and is not only insightful and delightful, but paradigm shifting:

“As developing countries have become more integrated into the world economy, and less dependent on aid, so their interests have changed. The most important international events for developing countries this year were the repeated failures of European leaders to put in place a credible plan to save the euro, the G20′s decision to put the world trade talks out of their misery, and modest progress at the Durban talks on climate change. These will all have more impact on developing countries than gatherings of the “development set” at World Bank meetings, the UN general assembly or the Busan forum on aid effectiveness” (Owen Barder, Guardian)

What struck me about Owen’s statement is that it goes to the core of knowledge and learning. Specifically, that more than ever, we have to locate the agendas, priorities and ideas of development within multiple disciplines and frameworks: International Relations, Psychology, History, Geopolitics, Ethnography, Economics, Trade, Finance, Politics, Sociology, etc.

Owen’s statement is particularly relevant and illustrative for countries such as Ghana, which the Financial Times sees as “an emerging black power, rather than an aid-dependent African reformer, collecting World Bank stars”. Ghana’s formulation of poverty reduction and economic growth strategies, budgetary decisions and resource allocation will have more to do with geopolitics, global and regional economics and domestic politics than with development frameworks, human rights and aid agendas. The latter usually being the bread and butter of aid and development online chatter.

My own personal experience of development discussions and readings, both on- and off-line, presume a unique space for development; not that it is regarded as unconnected from politics, trade and economics. It is axiomatic that development occupies the same space and time as these realities.

However (and I am very guilty of this), we presume development to be it’s own mastery, to have it’s own uniqueness; perhaps suffering from what Marc Bellemare referred to in a recent post as ‘chronocentrism’ – developmentcentrism. That what is happening now in Development is somehow different and unique compared to other periods in History. This is not unique to development.

“Indeed, for many, it seems difficult to take a long view of the history of economic thought and admit that, much as we chuckle at some of the research “findings” of a few hundred years ago (Malthus is a particularly good example), researchers 50 years from now will find plenty to criticize about our own work — if they read it at all”. (Marc Bellemare)

“The findings present a worrying picture of our sector. Humanitarian workers continue to face major barriers to training and professional development opportunities. For field- based staff, these barriers appear particularly insurmountable. Perhaps unsurprisingly the survey findings suggest that the humanitarian career pathway and barriers to access are as much about organisational culture and planning as they are about the physical location and cost of courses” (Jess Camburn, Director of ELRHA).

The findings Jess refers to can be found in the latest survey of professional development in the humanitarian sector, as conducted by Enhancing Learning and Research for Humanitarian Assistance (ELRHA). This is ELRHA’s second global survey, the first being a scoping study in April 2010, which demonstrated from over 1,500 responses that the sector suffers from uneven provision, fragmentation and uncoordinated approaches.

This second survey focuses on further exploring the state of professional development in the sector and received a total of 938 respondents through an online survey in English, French and Spanish. The findings will come as no surprise to many. The professionalisation of the humanitarian sector is becoming a topic of increasing regularity, particularly on Aidsource, which has a group dedicated to discussing the unploughed field. Paul Currion, who has been working on certification processes in the sector, wrote a post looking into the current state of certification and professionalisation, across different programme and process areas. He has also outlined the existing laws, principles, standards and guidelines.

“Take your average small NGO doing community-based work when a disaster hits. How easy do you think it’s going to be for them to meet all the requirements laid out in the documents listed in that table? It’s unfair to expect them to manage that, but it’s also unfair to expect them to stand to one side when the circus of bigger agencies rolls into town.”

Professional development

Many of the respondents report that they cannot attend professional development opportunities and trainings, both from the field and in headquarters. The top three reasons for not attending are, in order of frequency:

1. The lack of time and money in their organisation
2. The cost of courses: the ones people wanted to attend were too expensive and therefore not accessible
3. The lack of opportunities, due to small numbers of people being selected for training and development

Issues of inequity in professional development are also illuminated in the survey. In addition, and perhaps unintentionally, the survey responses also reveal the nature of relationships between internationally and nationally employed staff. This would appear to indicate that national staff are denied the opportunity to not only attend professional development pathways, but also to be trusted and given further responsibility. Just as there are discrepancies in access and inclusion to primary schooling across the world, there are the same within professional development in humanitarian work. In an increasing culture of ownership, empowerment and agency, surely these are glaring disparities that need to be addressed.

“African respondents also said that additional issues hampering locally employed staff were a reluctance to trust and give responsibility to national staff, and selection criteria that favour people who can travel internationally. This view was also supported by their European and Asian counterparts.”

Core competencies

What competencies are need to work effectively, innovatively and responsively in this sector? UNICEF has three core competencies for all staff and a number of functional competencies for staff working in different programme/operation sectors. The three core competencies are “Drive for Results,” “Communication” and “Working with People.” There various dimensions under each competency, for which there are three levels that staff are expected to develop, demonstrate and be evaluated against. However, these are only applicable to UNICEF staff. ELRHA, in partnership with the Consortium of British Humanitarian Agencies and People in Aid, have developed a competencies framework of domains, outcomes, and behaviours for all staff working in the humanitarian sector (which you can download here). The following is the list of competencies and one example of a core behaviour for all humanitarian staff.

• Understanding the humanitarian context

Demonstrate understanding of the gender and diversity dimensions of humanitarian solutions

• Applying humanitarian standards and principles

Demonstrate an understanding of coordination mechanisms

• Ensuring programme quality and impact

Maintain focus on delivery of timely and appropriate results using available resources

• Working accountably

Be answerable to crisis-affected people for your actions and decisions

• Making decisions

Consider the wider impact of your decisions in order to achieve results

• Listening and creating dialogue

Actively listen to new and different perspectives and experiences of crisis-affected people, stakeholders and team members

• Working with others

Challenge decisions and behaviour which breach the IRC and Red Crescent and NGOs/individual agency Codes of Conduct

• Minimising risk to communities, partners and stakeholders

Take measures to “do no harm” and to minimise risks for your partners and the crisis-affected people you work with

• Managing personal safety and security

Build and sustain acceptance for your work in line with humanitarian principles and standards

• Adapting and coping

Recognise personal stress and take steps to reduce it

• Maintaining professionalism

Demonstrate personal integrity by using one’s position responsibly and fairly

• Self-awareness

Seek and reflect on feedback to improve your performance

• Motivating and influencing others

Inspire confidence in others

• Critical judgement

Demonstrate initiative and suggest creative improvements and better ways of working

What competencies and behaviours do you demonstrate? Which ones do you need to develop?

The competency framework is extremely applicable to professionals in the development sector, not just the humanitarian. Indeed, the distinctions between “aid work” and “development work” are becoming less clear and more problematic. All we need to do is replace the phrase “crisis-affected people.”

It is important to note for your own professional development that critical reflection and self-awareness underpin and enable all of the core behaviours. According to the survey results, “85% of survey respondents felt that the featured humanitarian competencies represented those that were necessary for professional development of aid workers either very well or fairly well: 35% and 50% respectively.” However, the most frequently cited omission from the competencies essentially evolves around inclusion:

1) Communicating and working effectively with disaster-affected populations

2) Involving them in disaster response programmes

3) Measuring overall performance against disaster-affected expectations

Again, replace “disaster response” with “intervention,” and “disaster-affected populations” with “communities,” and the above three competencies and behaviours are directly applicable to non-humanitarian contexts.

Professionalising aid work: the way forward

It is a big task, and one which some may argue is not necessary and will only contribute to the growth of the Industrial-Aid Complex. But, here are the main issues I see with going forward:

• Inequity in the workplace: both in terms of gender balance and representation in senior management, and between White Saviours and non-White Saviours. 
• Disparity: any field of human endeavour can contribute to development. Is it possible to create a sense of ‘Profession’ across the many communities of practice and professions?
• Working together: organisations and governments will need to collaborate with universities (pre-service) to shape and design courses for development studies. The current studies available may not be producing the type of development workers needed.
• Funding: show me the money.

What are your thoughts?

After all, when evaluating a Redfin job applicant one of the big questions I’m trying to answer is “when did she do something hard?”

It could be something you put yourself through for fun like running a marathon or far more serious like fighting in a war. It could be the grinding repetition of preparing for a piano recital or the grit required to dig ditches or paint houses for a living. It could be raising a child all by yourself.

Maybe some of these examples sound preposterous to you, but they’re what the rest of America does every day. Looking for candidates who have visited that hard place in themselves at one point in their life isn’t some Marxist fantasy of mine. It’s how capitalism works best. (“Searching For Beasts In Silicon Valley’s ‘War For Talent’,” Glenn Kelman, CEO of Redfin, on TechCrunch)

“Searching for Beasts”. I love this phrase in the title of Kelman’s post. If anthropomorphism (“human-shaped”) is the personification of human characteristics to animals, then describing someone as a Beast is the best example of re-anthropomorphism.  A Beast conjures images of hunger, desire, commitment and strength. And, like a ‘Beast’, we must do what the head of products at Kelman’s first start-up job advised him to do again and again: “Just go figure it out”.

Beasts are perhaps not even real; at least not in our taxonomy of the animal kingdom. It is a generic term, at its base, for a wild animal. Its form does not hold shape in our consciousness. Tiger – sure. Dragon – awesome. Unicorn – majestic. Beast – ummm, what? I saw a show in Mexico once…

That is why no major sporting franchise has adopted the Beast as its flag-bearer. Viking, Titan, Jazz, Fire, Storm, Cardinal, Yankee. These all call to mind a shape. A character. A definition. The re-anthropomorphic representation of a city or geographical area and a group of people professionally employed to improve and showcase their athletic talents. What does a ‘Beast’ call to mind? Darkness. Untamed. Feral. Uncivilised. Not the best mascot for a city.

But, it appears that someone or some movement, has started to take it back as both a noun and a verb (perhaps the same movement that has taken back ‘crush’, as in “I’m crushing this essay!”). Certain athletes are described as ‘Beasts’ for their consistent performances that demonstrate something unreal (as in “Dwight Howard is a Beast!” or “Marshawn Lynch is a Beast!“). And, it is time we start talking about the search and need for Beasts in the aid and development sector.

The ‘Beast’ within

The relationship, interaction and embodiment between humans and beasts pre-dates written histories, as Tom Henighan describes.The Sumerians, Greeks and Romans all have stories that helped create this idea of the Beast.

In the famous Roman picaresque novel The Golden Ass of Lucius Apuleius (born 125 C.E.) , the hero is metamorphosed into a jackass, as punishment for his curiosity and lust. The beast within is embodied concretely in the transformation of his outward shape, and he is cured only by the rose of love and the goddess Isis (Tom Henighan).

Stories in the Bible depict demons associated with animals, with Beasts. They are dark side of human nature, which every one is at risk of falling prey to if tempted. More contemporary ideas of the Beast reflect more positive attributes, such as having good instincts.

We need to amend and expand the advice given to Kelman, which will better reflect the attitude of a moden Beast: “Just got figure it out and do what it takes“.

Discussions about studying and working in the humanitarian world are often timid, deferential and sentimental. Forget about whether or not it is fair to complete the mandatory internships or volunteer placements. Just go figure it out and do what it takes. Yes, there is some valuable career advice from people smarter than you or I, but just go figure it out and do what it takes.

The aid and development sector needs athletes that are tough and resourceful, from both the so called ‘Global North’ and ‘Global South’. Certainly not the Harlem Globetrotters, who were technically skilful, entertaining and could win a game or two (and certainly not any one who has appeared in a Harlem Shake video).

The typical humanitarian worker is like the Beast in many ways, but particularly in terms of shape. How do you define this person? What do they look like? There is no discernable shape or form that holds. For some, it will be the UN, fishing jacket-wearing on a background of conflict, disease and displacement. Or, it is the business-casual, desk-riding bureaucrat on a background of reports, resolutions and system failures. There is no one standard mould. We need to re-imagine any and all these forms that come to mind, as they do not quite hold up.

This concept of the Beast taps into the human-potential movement, which everyone from economists to educators have been framing. However, it is critical to realise that no matter how committed, hungry or strong you are, you will fail. You will not always meet your own expectations or the expectations of others. You will not get satisfaction all the time. As Joan Acocella’s recent review of psychoanalyst Adam Phillips’ latest book said, in identfiying the crux of Phillip’s essay, “on occasion we’ll get satisfaction and on occasion we won’t”.

Kelmen reflects on his progress and what it took to get to the other side of the interview table. He states that one of the biggest questions that he is trying to answer in reviewing job applications is: “when did she do something hard?”

I love this too, and it fits nicely in the Beast mould. Kelmen references actions like running a marathon, being a soldier, painting houses or a living, or being a single parent. So, ask yourself, “when did you do something hard?” When did you do something that required you to be tough, resourceful, hungry and committed?

However, a Beast like any animal also has to rest, recuperate and recover. And, the central advice still applies here to preventing stress and burnout: “Just go figure it out and do what it takes” to take care of yourself.

This does not mean finding a work-life balance. Alessandra Pigni finds the concept of ‘work-life balance’ irrelevant and outdated. She refers to creating, finding and nurturing ‘work-life meaning’. Figure out what it takes to be healthy in what you do, and do what ever it takes to find work and a workplace that has meaning. Athletes take care of themselves in everything they do, both in competition and in preparation for competition.

When did you do something hard? How are you a Beast in your development job?

These actions are not about aid/development work, and aid/development work is not about you. But, you cannot take yourself completely out of your work. For many, their professional life defines them (for better or worse). However, you can change, and collectively, we can change, how we communicate about ourselves and what we do. Indeed, it is important to acknowledge what your work means to you. This is in no way similar to making your work about you.

We asked the participants in our Peer Coaching Pilot to respond to the following question with an image: What does aid/development mean to you?

We have six submissions so far, and want to open this call to action to you. Send your image that best describes what aid/development means to you.

You can send your images to submissions@whydev.org. Please include a short description of the image and why you chose it.

“Aid, to me, is all about encouragement. I may not always be able to give money to the people seeking grants, but that doesn’t mean I can’t treat them with respect and give their email a thoughtful response. Replies like the one shown in my photo are the ones that keep me going. If I was the most encouraging person he had interact with in 6 years, then I must be doing something right. Also, for me, aid/development work IS computer/email work!” – Tanya Cothran

“I like this picture because to me, international development is working for the people to get them the tools to work for their own development. In this picture, the teacher is Haitian and she is teaching Haitians. She was educated in this school. What I also like in this picture, is that it is a woman teaching mechanics to men mostly in a professional school.” - Johanne Veilleux

In some ways, reading People In Aid’s latest report on ‘The State of HR in International Humanitarian and Development Organisations’ reminded us of going shopping at a local organic grocery store: great local food, friendly staff who work in a cooperative way, making the right choices for ourselves and the environment even if the carrots are not perfect and the potatoes seem a bit overpriced. But, then you pass by the big box store of a global supermarket chain where a full parking lot indicates that shoppers are taking advantage of those low, low prices. The organisations who take part in the report and discussions seem a bit like the local grocery store, but we were also left with a feeling that the big and powerful multinationals of the aid industry are represented less when it comes to best HR practices, critical self-reflections and sharing new ideas to make humanitarian aid work ‘better’ for everybody involved – at least that often seems the case when we speak with friends who work for the ‘global supermarkets’.

One of the biggest challenges that the report tries to address is that it shares best HR practices and presents humanitarian HR as a professional managerial discipline within the aid industry. When it comes to teaching, training and mentoring (see for example the case study on Save The Children’s cooperation with executive management coaches for new country directors, p.15) humanitarian HR certainly tries to look at ideas from other sectors, and an important aspect of the report is that it shares case studies that may raise the bar for the whole industry as people learn what good employers and employees can and should offer.

But, the report also highlights that some metrics, e.g. the cost of security per humanitarian worker or days spent on learning and development, are still largely absent (p.10). On the other hand, the managerial approach is often faced with the political realities of humanitarian situations and can lead to a “high level of disillusionment from longer-term staff” as indicated by studies in the aftermath of the Haiti earthquake (p.17). This reminded us of Jonathan Katz’ book on this subject that found political dynamics in post-disaster situations seem to be unchanged, which could sideline well-intentioned HR efforts.

The most interesting aspect, and probably most relevant in the WhyDev context, were the reflections on the “rise of Generation Z” and the prediction that “HR professionals are going to have to employ some very different recruitment tactics if they are to harness the enthusiasm and technical abilities of this new group in the marketplace” (p.22). We think that the challenge will go beyond the ‘espressos & cool food’, but also beyond the “creative, fun and inspirational environment” that the report identifies (pp.23-24). J.’s recent post on ‘Hands-On’ experience is a good example that professionalised, office-focussed humanitarian work may offer neither espressos nor the thrills of ‘making a difference’ – in the traditional sense of the ‘hands-on’ work of helping people and rebuilding schools. But, there is a deeper level of misunderstanding in this paragraph on who the ‘Generation Z’ is, how they communicate and, most importantly, what they are looking for career-wise.

We have doubts that the authors really understand how ‘Generation Z’ engage and use social media, not only in their personal lives, but also in their professional lives for communicating, learning and networking. Just being “open about social media, don’t ban Facebook, LinkedIn etc.” (p.23) may only scratch at the surface. In addition, the paragraph is quite presumptive about ‘Generation Z’, suggesting that they will be less loyal, unfocused and uninterested in building a career. “These people do not stick around and build a career…information security issues, such as loss of trade secrets” (p.23). Not only are we a little offended, but think this shows a gross misunderstanding of the nature of humanitarian work and what it takes to build a stable career in the sector (particularly during an ongoing economic downturn, which is the focus of the report). One of the few avenues to a stable career is through the international civil service. We are not sure the authors know what an uncertain, competitive and fluid marketplace and environment it is, nor what Generation Z really wants.

Another issue that is absent from the report is the lack of linkages back to higher education for skill development and learning for future professionals. Many of the skills identified as lacking or being under-represented and under-addressed – teamwork, leadership, professional management, etc. – are those that can be facilitated and nurtured in higher education programmes. There is a proliferation of courses, both undergraduate and postgraduate, around the world offering ‘International Development Studies’ (IDS). Yet, the current state of higher education for development is perhaps not well-known or understood, nor are IDS teachers and organisational HR engaging with one another. We do not think that many of these courses adequately prepare graduates for working in the sector/s, and open debate around the ‘vocationalisation’ of IDS have not really emerged yet. If we need to address many of the areas identified in this report, then it should start in the emerging university courses being offered.

The report and subsequent discussions also help to shine a light on the importance of good HR in general, rather than perpetuating the stereotypes that The Office’s own HR officer, Toby, represents.

‘The State of HR’ shares some interesting, best-practice case studies on how the aid industry’s human resources can be valued and managed better, but it doesn’t really manage to think outside the box, especially when it comes to engaging with Generation Z and higher education. Furthermore, the report mentions work-life balance, but we were surprised that it did not go into more detail regarding psychological wellbeing, burn-out or PTSD. Although it is tacitly acknowledged under ‘Duty of Care’, there is a distinct lack of recommendations or a way forward offered.

You need only to take a cursory look at research into stress, isolation and burnout in the sector to realise two important things: it is highly under-researched and understood; and as a result, we know very little about the well being of humanitarian workers or how to care for their health. There is still a pervasive attitude, particularly from more experienced professionals, of fatalism. That this is the nature of the work, and we must just ‘suck it up’. The well being of humanitarian aid workers is not taken seriously, and it is time for a culture shift in understanding the mental health needs of humanitarian workers (which a few are coming together to do outside the formal structures of organisational HR: Amanda Scothern, Zehra Rizvi, Marianne Elliot and one of the authors of this post).

There are certainly some areas where the debate needs additional momentum, particularly in: how to engage and cater for the next generation of humanitarian workers; how to creatively and practically address HR issues during a time of budget cuts and restraints; how stronger linkages can be developed with higher education institutions to better prepare students for the workplace; and the recognition of and engagement in mental health issues. In a supply-driven labour market with politically fragile humanitarian situations, and some traditional debates (e.g. about expatriate remuneration or local talent), there is a risk that good aid HR may be for some time remain the equivalent of your local boutique grocer – although we always wish that more of us would spend more money in the them.

Tobias Denskus is a post-doctoral development anthropologist interested in peacebuilding, the ritualisation of aid professionalism & the impact of social media on policy-making and reflective writing.

Senator Bob Carr, Australia’s Foreign Minister, justifies this allocation: ”As the OECD sees it, money spent supporting refugees on your own soil is a valid expenditure of aid money”. And, although the response from Australia’s aid/development sector has been swift in denouncing the move, Mr. Carr is correct. Grinch or not, Australia can, and already does, do this; and so do many other OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) member countries.

This is not a ‘cut’ in Australia’s aid as many are claiming. It is a re-allocation. However, neither perhaps is it a standard practice (read: accounting practice) that should still exist. It is indicative and representative of a global aid system that fails to allocate aid in ways that could have the greatest and most transparent impact.

To under what this $375 million decision means, we need to get beyond the rhetoric of #dontcutaid, and delve into the murky abyss that is OECD DAC reporting guidelines and directives.

“In-donor refugee costs”

This is the label for the line item in OECD country’s reported aid budget referring to money spent in-country on the needs of refugees. According to the OECD, specific instruction on reporting was first introduced in 1988, in which donor countries could report expenditures on refugees as aid. This directive has essentially remained unchanged since.

In 2010, only $4.4 million (or 0.17% of Australia’s aid budget) was ‘in-donor refugee costs’. This year was also the first year Australia allocated any significant part of its aid budget to ‘in-donor refugee costs’. According to OECD statistics, between 2006-2008, nothing was reported in Australia’s aid budget as ‘in-donor refugee costs’.

Needless to say, this is a very significant increase, and may be justified in the context of increasing the annual number of refugees resettled in Australia by 6,000 (per the recommendations of the independent review panel earlier this year).

This is a standard practice of OECD countries. The Netherlands and Norway, both which have strong refugee resettlement programs, allocated 5.3% and 7.3% of their 2010 aid budget respectively to ‘in-donor refugee costs’. Switzerland allocated a sizeable 15.9% of its aid budget.

Indeed, ‘in-donor refugee costs’ are trending. According to OECD DAC reporting, “Over the period 2006-10, the total volume of ODA in-donor refugee costs reported by DAC members has doubled in nominal terms, from USD 1.8 billion to USD 3.6 billion. The share in total net ODA has also risen steadily from 1.6% to 2.5% over the same period”.

Is it aid?

Yes, technically it is Official Development Assistance (ODA); the DAC’s official term for the aid its member countries disburse. But, there are a number of things to keep in mind in light of Mr. Carr’s announcement and our response to it.

1. It may be used to cover a variety of expenditures beyond basic necessities. The $375 million will be used for “expenditures for the sustenance of refugees in donor countries during the first twelve months of their stay. This includes payments for refugees’ transport to the host country and temporary sustenance (food, shelter and training); these expenditures should not be allocated geographically” [This is according to Line I.A.8.2 Refugees in donor countries (code 1820) of the DAC Statistical Reporting Directives]. However, there is no standard practice in this regard, and the costs of various assistance programs can also be covered (e.g. professional training, administrative costs, police, interpretation, or counselling, resettlement assistance for quota refugees).

2. According to the Government, it has already ‘released’ 400 asylum seekers on bridging visas while their claims are assessed. However, according to the above DAC guidelines, only 12 months of  expenditures can be covered under ‘in-donor refugee costs’.

3. Australia could spend the money to cover costs of detention centres on Nauru and Christmas Island. The costs, expenditures and ‘type’ of refugee covered vary from country to country. For example, many countries, including the Netherlands and Norway, spend ‘in-donor refugee costs’ while asylum seekers are waiting for a decision on their claim to refugee status. Others, including Canada and the U.S, allocate it cover expenditures after a decision has been made regarding asylum seekers’ claim (see table below for an overview). This includes the expenditures on asylum seekers who have their claims rejected.

4. The average cost per refugee under this budget item varies from country to country. In Canada, it was just above an average of USD10,000 for 12 months in 2009. In Belgium, the average was over USD32,500 for 12 months for the same year. Clearly, the $375 million will not just cover the 12-month expenditures of the 400 asylum seekers on bridging visas (unless the Government spends $937,000 per asylum seeker over 12 months).

From: ODA REPORTING OF IN-DONOR COUNTRY REFUGEE COSTS
Members’ methodologies for calculating costs

The Australian Council for International Development (ACFID) has called on the Australian Government to identify what programs will be cut as a result of this re-allocation. In addition, the Australian Government should further identify, in the current spirit of transparency and accountability, what ‘in-donor refugee costs’ will be covered by the $375 million.

In 1994, concerns were expressed by a number of DAC member countries to a Working Party, and the Secretariat recommended phasing out the reporting of ‘in-donor refugee costs’. That is, many members felt that the 12-month up-keep of refugees in donor countries should no longer be reportable as ODA. However, no consensus was reached. Austria, Germany and Japan originally objected. The Director of Development Co-operation Directorate (DCD) wrote to delegations in June 1994, observing that:

“Members have increasingly come to query the developmental relevance of expenditure on refugees in developed countries…Moreover, the ODA definition requires expenditures to be made ‘with the promotion of the economic development and welfare of developing countries” as [the] main objective’. Thus ODA-eligibility depends on the intention of the donor at the time of the transaction, not on the ultimate impact of the transaction….As donor assistance to incoming refugees is designed to meet their welfare needs, and not to promote the development of their countries of origin, it falls outside the ODA definition, even though it is patently a component of humanitarian assistance…”.

The Director then suggested that each member country create a schedule of how to achieve the elimination of ‘in-donor refugee costs’ from ODA by the year 2000. When member states reconvened on this issue after 2000, and after extensive statistical research and dialogue, there was still no consensus by 2002.

Australia, at the time, wanted to maintain ODA reporting of these ‘in-donor refugee costs’. Although Australia is under no obligation to either report or not report, the Federal Government could join Korea and Luxembourg as the only other DAC member countries that do not report ‘in-donor refugee costs’ as foreign aid; and become a true leader in calling for the more effective allocation of aid.

Then, I’ve rewritten small (very small) portions of the original to reflect Macklemore’s angst in the hiphop industry to my own in the aid industry.

All credit and respect to Macklemore for the original lyrics.

White Privilege (Aid Work Remix feat. BJRigby)

I see so many people lost who really try to pretend
but am I just another aid worker who has caught on to the trend
when I take a step in the field is poverty closer to the end?

‘Cause when I go to TEDxshows the majority have white skin
They marketed the microloan, the rct and the swedow
and white economists really get the most spins

the face of poverty has changed a lot since Bono and them
and if their taking away the poor’s dignity I look just like them
claimed a culture that wasn’t mine, the way of the american

aid work is gentrified and where will all the people live
it’s like washington district, geneva to south-south
being pushed farther away because of what white people did, now

where’s my place in a calling that’s been taken by my race
cultural misappropriated by the white face
and we don’t want to admit that this is existing
so scared to acknowledge the benefits of our white privilege

cause it’s human nature to want to be part of something different
especially when your ancestors are European Christians
and most whites don’t want to acknowledge this is occurring
cause we got the best deal, the work without the burden
of being poor in a system that wants a white man’s burden

cause all you need is a project and you can go and make poverty history too
and we hate gender mainstreaming cause we’re the ones that took it
now we listen to K’naan and wear t-shirts that say ‘I’m African Too’

but it’s not about black and white right
I mean good aid is good aid regardless of what you look like
but when you don’t give them props isn’t that selfish?
that like saying Africa was actually found by Geldof
so where does this leave me?

I feel like I pay dues but I’ll always be a white #aidworker
I give everything I have when I write a tweet
but that doesn’t change the fact that this culture’s not mine

But I’m gonna be me so please be who you are
this is something effortless and shouldn’t be hard
I said I’m gonna be me so please be who you are
but they still owe us consent we’ve stolen their images for instagram

(chorus)
Inequality started off in poverty that I’ve never been through
creating a cycle of struggle that I’ve never been through
if I think I understand just because I visit the field too
that means I’m not keep it true, nope

(chorus cont.)
Inequality started off in poverty that I’ve never been through
creating a cycle of struggle that I’ve never been through
if I think I understand just because I visit the field too
that means I’m not keep it true, nope

now I don’t rap about income so they label me a humanities
but I don’t rap about income cause I wasn’t forced into poverty
see I was put in the position where I could chose my options
blessed with the privilege that my parents could send me to college

now who’s going to blog the kids in the camps starving
or the white people with domains that can relate their content?
marketed the suffering now addicted to the aid work
what happened to jazz and rock and roll is happening right now

where’s my place in the world that’s been taken by the Guardian
with world food programmes controlling what their feeding ya
I brought up Amartya Sen but Im not even listening dude
we love aid work and what do you think caucasians are signing up to

and I speak freely when I write this
if I examine equality there goes the other half of equality, gender
and this is so true. and we didn’t even have to fight the system
we just went and picked up Poor Economics too

and we got good at it so we should be clapping
but only supporting them is like burning Gates and buying Blattman
now Blattman’s incredible. but no Gates no foundation
so here comes history and the cultural misappropriation

white kids with corn rows trying to practice their accents
from the suburbs to the Upper Nile mastering a language
but the poverty line is not just living below
it’s rooted in authenticity something you literally can’t learn

But I’m gonna be me so please be who you are
this is something that’s effortless and shouldn’t be hard
I said I’m gonna be me so please be who you are
but as I’m blessed with the privilege, they’re still left behind the cars

(chorus)

Today, we will close registration and begin matching people one-to-one and get them started on their peer coaching partnership. Just to give you an idea of who has registered, here is a snap shot of the peer coaches:

• Over 70% are women
• Just shy of 58% are aged between 26-35. Only 17% are older than 36 years of age
• Almost 75% have 5 years or less experience working in aid/development
• And, a whopping 91% indicate that they want to be matched with someone in the SAME sector

If you are young and just getting your career moving, then this program is for you. At the same time, we have a small, select group of very experienced professionals who are looking for a peer coach of similar standing. This program is open to everyone working in aid and development and neither age nor experience should discourage you.

In addition, it is not limited to ‘being in the field’ or even in the traditional aid sector. You could be working at community-based organisations in regional Australia or at a social business start-up in Kolkata. If you are working towards social justice, human rights and a more peaceful world, then peer coaching will work for you.

Although we encourage more men to apply (as with dating in the aid world, there seems to be a noticeable lack of men), gender is not an important determinant.

It is also shaping up to be a truly global network of peer coaches. Participants are living in the U.S, Haiti, China, Cambodia, Kenya, Ghana, Laos, Solomon Islands, Belgium, Niger, Uganda, UK, Madagascar and Nicaragua to name just a few.

This is your last chance to be part of this innovative, experimental and career-changing program. You will be matched with a peer of similar professional background and experience, and given extensive support from the team at WhyDev on how to get the most out of your peer coaching partnership.

Don’t miss out. Register here.

Aizawl, Mizoram

Mizoram is a little known state in northeast India, located between Bangladesh and Burma (Myanmar). Occupying an environment of rolling hills, its capital Aizawl is perched across a ridge line, creating a dramatically beautiful and steep city.

As far as Indian states go, Mizoram does not fit the stereotype. You would be forgiven if you did not think you were in India. The majority of the state’s population are a collection of several ethnic communities, who are culturally and linguistically linked and collectively known as Mizo, meaning ‘people of the hills’. The majority of Mizos are also Christian and alcohol is banned within the state. Mizoram is also the Indian state that accounts for the majority of refugees from Burma.

It is estimated that between 50,000-100,000 refugees from Burma are residing in northeast India, mostly in Mizoram. The refugees are predominantly from the Chin state of Burma, who have and continue to be systematically persecuted by the Burmese military junta.

However, to gain official status as a refugee, in the hope of finding protection and being resettled in a third country, the Chin have to make their way to The UN Refugee Agency’s (UNHCR) office in New Delhi. It is estimated that 600 Chin refugees try to make their way to New Delhi each month, a journey of over 1,300 miles. UNHCR is not allowed to operate in northeast India, and the Chin who live there do so without protection or legal status. Without legal or refugee status, their life in Mizoram is precarious and full of daily challenges relating to employment, access to education and health services and deportation.

New Market in Aizawl

I travelled to Mizoram in 2009 as part of a team from the Centre for Refugee Research (CRR). At the time, I was completing my Masters in International Development Studies at the University of NSW, Australia. An option for this course was to complete an internship with the CRR, for which you would assist in designing and implementing human rights consultations and workshops with refugee communities in either India or Thailand.

The CRR, led by Dr. Eileen Pittaway, who was awarded the Order of Australia this year, has long worked with refugee communities in facilitating their capacity to advocate for their human rights. The two weeks I spent with the Chin refugee communities in both Aizawl and New Delhi were shocking, inspiring and transformational.

Such experiences are undoubtedly life-changing. They are also increasingly sought after, and the demand for such has witnessed the growth of the so-called ‘voluntourism’ industry. However, it is an industry that is largely unregulated, fraught with dangers for both volunteers and the people and communities organisations are purporting to help.

At the same time, such opportunities and certain organisations can offer truly rich and meaningful experiences. The experience with CRR was not a voluntourism experience, and was probably closer to an ‘internship in the field’. However, it is often difficult to know what you are in for. This post is not intended as a critique of ‘voluntourism’. There are already many out there. Instead, I want to offer a guide for readers who are looking to have similar experiences. Volunteering is activity that should be pursued regularly, but not without a critical understanding of why you are doing it, who you are doing it through and how you should pursue it.

The following are posts and resources that I urge you to read, consider and reflect on before you sign up for ‘voluntourism’ experience.

The Pearls

Dóchas, The Irish Association of Non-Governmental Development Organisation, has created this Prezi-type resource that is as comprehensive as it is accessible. It is a unique resource that brings together many of the themes explored by the authors listed below. In particular, it highlights topics that are not always considered, such as the prospect of volunteer opportunities in your home country. Of interest to those of you who have impact on your mind, there is also a pearl dedicated to exploring the benefits and outcomes of volunteering.

The Dedicated

Alexia Nestora Voluntourism Gal

Written by Alexia Nestora, a voluntourism industry consultant, this site offers extensive research links on voluntourism for those who want to really sink their teeth into the industry. Alexia also offers succinct summaries of voluntourism opportunities and organisations. Although it is a site aimed at industry professionals, the blog posts offer dedicated and fresh insights from within the industry. The posts also aggregate interesting content, media and links for you to explore until your heart’s content. In particular, if you are wanting to volunteer at an orphanage, Alexia urges you to think again.

The Analytic

Aaron Ausland ‘Poverty Tourism: A Debate in Need of Typological Nuance’

Aaron Ausland has worked in international development for over 15 years, and is currently the Director of Independent Research and Evaluation (IRE) at World Vision. His article provides a very good framework for your research, because not all poverty/development tourism experiences are created equal. There are differences and nuances that have often been over-looked in the debate. How is ‘voluntourism’ different from ‘slum tours’? Where does ‘study abroad’ fit into the picture? Aaron has created a taxonomy for classifying the variety of experiences on offer. You should use this when researching opportunities, organisations and experiences to see where they fit in. On ‘voluntourism’, Aaron concludes, that it is an experience that is usually more tourism than volunteerism:

“I think I’d rather the tourist observe, struggle with their desire to do something right then and there, discuss, reflect, and then go home to figure out what the experience means for them and how they can be part of something bigger than themselves that is helping make a lasting change”.

Aaron also wrote a longer post dedicated to examining voluntourism here, and it is well worth the read.

The Alternative

Daniela Papi ‘What’s wrong with volunteer travel?’

This is a presentation that Daniela gave at TEDxOxbridge. It is short, only 10 minutes, but a fantastic primer for thinking critically about voluntourism. Daniela was the Executive Director (2005-2011) and Founder of PEPY Tours, a social venture that seeks to facilitate ‘learning service’ for volunteers. PEPY has also produced two fantastic resources that you cannot go past. First, ‘Learning Service: Tips and Tricks for Learning Before Helping’. This is a brilliant tool that will help you responsibly choose a volunteer placement. Read it.

Second, ‘Learning Service: Volunteer’s Charter’. This tool will help you, once you have found placement, improve your role within an organisation. The underlying theme of both resources is learning, for empathy, for change and for exchange. ‘Learning service’ builds on the concept of empathy learning, which Daniela explores in her TEDx presentation. Daniela also recounts her own volunteering experiences, looks at recent trends and talks about future practices. She wants to see the industry ‘stop sympathy volunteering and start empathy learning’.

“If you plant papayas, you can’t get mangoes” (Cambodian saying).

See also, Daniela Papi’s ‘Voluntourism: What could go wrong when trying to do right’

The Personal

J.B. Mckinnon ‘The Dark Side of Volunteer Tourism’

J.B. is the Malawi projects coordinator for I Live Here. In this article, he recounts his experience as a voluntourist in Malawi, attempting to set up a creative writing program for orphans in jail. It is a personal account, both self-aware and self-deprecating. It offers no easy answers. J.B. does not say definitively whether voluntourism is ‘good’ or ‘bad’, but offers three conclusions that he has reflected upon.

“First, nothing is likely to stop the increase in person-to-person contact between people of the richer nations and people of the poorer. Second, there is much to be gained on both sides from this exchange. Third, those gains will be made through a series of small, personal, humbling errors”.

From here, it is up to you how you conduct this exchange.

This post originally appeared as a guest post on Jetset Times

…Many work on development projects in fields such as education, sanitation, health, agriculture and urban/rural/small business development.

Work in this sector is diverse and encompasses governance, healthcare, education, gender equality, disaster preparedness, infrastructure, economics, livelihoods, human rights, forced migration, security, conflict and the environment.

Career areas include administration, research, fundraising, training, consultancy, advocacy, relief work and economist roles, as well as professional roles within health work, medicine, engineering and planning.

I  may as well reply, “It’s life, the universe and everything”. You can almost hear Marvin replying, “Life? Don’t talk to me about life”.

The job description of an aid and development worker also makes it hard to translate knowledge, skills and learning for the job into a university degree. Karen Attiah, a recent graduate, thinks about the role that higher education plays in what she calls a ‘flawed system’. Tobias Denskus responds in three parts, arguing that “The problem is that graduate school is not simply a problem solver, door opener, job facilitator, but ideally an exercise in critical learning which is less tangible”.

A Complementary Basic Education class in northern Ghana. Taken by 9-year old student, Alhassan.

Although the job description is all-encompassing, and your studies may not sufficiently prepare you, I do think there are certain and discrete competencies that you can develop and build to enable you to work effectively: what Tobias refers to as ‘critical learning’, which continues beyond the classroom. These are more than the desirable qualities of teamwork, critical thinking and an ability to work towards a deadline often found on job advertisements. In addition, many job application processes, particularly the later stages, include a competency-based interview. So, I reached out to colleagues, asking a simple question:

“What is the most important competency needed to work in aid and development?”

Those who I reached out to are intelligent, engaged, passionate and experienced. They know what they are talking about. They represent a broad range of backgrounds, experiences and knowledge, as fitting of the job description above. Those who aspire to work, or who already work, in this world should take note. They know what it takes to wedge a foot in the door, but more importantly, they also have an understanding of what it takes to be effective in working towards change.

• Shana Montesol Johnson, Executive career coach to development professionals

‘Adaptability’

“The question you ask sounds simple and easy, but in fact it’s quite complex — which is part of the reason there *aren’t* standard, agreed upon competencies in international development. For one thing, it’s an incredibly broad field. So when we speak of competencies, what we expect a water & sanitation specialist to demonstrate is going to differ from someone working in ICT4D. And maternal & child health expert is going to have different technical competencies than a director of development (the fundraising kind of “development”)…If there were one I would add, it would be along the lines of adaptability. Whether one is adapting to a new culture in order to be effective in the field, or one is adapting to an unexpected cut in funding, there are always ways that development professionals must adapt in order to succeed. And it’s not only the tactical side of adapting (e.g., “should I do X in order to cause Y?”) but the attitude – expecting to learn from others; listening well; taking time to reflect; being open to new ways of thinking, seeing the world, and doing things”

• Weh Yeoh, Disability development worker

‘Sensitivity’

“The most important competency is the recognition that change must occur through championing ideas and initiatives of people within poor countries, and that long lasting change can only really occur through aid centred around the needs of beneficiaries. This means specifically targeting and seeking out the voices of those who are least commonly heard. Having this attitude does not make foreign aid workers obsolete though. There is a time and a place for outside opinions and expertise, as long as it is used to give people what they really want and need, rather than forcing it upon them”.

• Lara Quarterman

‘Project management’

“If I can answer simply, it would be that the principles of project management in a broad sense are the most important competency for those working within the field of development.  Understanding the project cycle and the technical knowledge required for the planning, implementation, reporting, and evaluation is essential.  Because of the nature of development projects being relatively short term and funded by external donors, understanding project management is relevant regardless of the specific sector or country you are working in.  Becoming familiar with tools like logical frameworks, work plans, and budgets as well as funding modalities of various donors can be useful for those wishing to enter the field”.

• Tom Murphy, Co-Founder at Development and Aid World News Service (DAWNS)

‘Humility’

“I would say the ability to know when to ask for help and to not be afraid to ask. Having worked personally and managed people who have been in higher stress jobs, the people who thrive are the ones that are willing to ask for resources, help and advice. It is vital to remember that the people that surround you have knowledge that they can share that will help make your work/life easier. There are times to try to figure it out on your own, but there are times to understand your limits and seek out an expert. Such a skill requires the humility to know your own limits”.

• Jennifer Lentfer, M&E Advisor for American Red Cross

‘Facilitation’

“Whether you are chairing a meeting, conducting an interview, or delivering a training, every aid worker must be a good facilitator. This means being able to create and sustain an environment where people can speak openly and where collaboration, dialogue, and learning occur. You’ve got to have the right mix of communication and listening skills, tact, resourcefulness, creativity, and perhaps most important, a willingness to be yourself, warts and all. The ability to display warmth and quickly establish rapport with people may be considered a “soft skill” but it’s probably the most challenging and most important skill for aid workers to build”.

• Tobias Denskus, Development & social media researcher

‘Perseverance’

“This is one of those questions that is tempting to answer with a nice allegory (‘Working in development is like competing in every Olympic discipline at the same time’) or with a quote from someone famous and/or from the Global South. But in a nutshell, I would say most of it comes down to *perseverance* – the ‘continued effort to do or achieve something despite difficulties, failure, or opposition’ (Merriam Webster). I don’t know many ‘industries’ that rely to such a large extend on issues outside their control, are blamed for many things and get credit for very few other than the aid industry. But I also believe that perseverance to work in development means that you should never stop believing in, talking about and working towards alternatives to the ‘way things are’. Whether you face global economic realities, listen to people from other walks of life and point out ‘development issues’ whereever you live, work and play, you will need the perseverance to continue despite ignorance, setbacks and that one out-of-context example (usually involving an autocratic regime/dictator of your choice) that always ridicules your argument. And I don’t think there is an ‘it gets better’ philosophy to wrap it up”.

• Marianne Elliott, Human rights consultant and writer

‘Empathy’

“I’ve thought about this a lot and it is very hard to choose just one. As with most fields, this work requires a wide range of competencies. But if I have to chose one, I’d have to go with empathy, by which I mean the capability to understand another person’s circumstances, point of view, thoughts and feelings. Empathy is different from sympathy, the feeling of concern for another, and pity, the belief or feeling that someone is in need of help. It is essential to our ability to understand another person’s experience of the world, and therefore essential to our ability to support individuals and communities to find their own solutions to development and humanitarian challenges”.

• Ed Carr, Associate Professor and development professional

‘Critical self-awareness + think integratively’

“In short, I would say that the most important competency is the ability to honest evaluate the situation, your role in it, and adjust to better meet the needs of beneficiaries. How you get to that is not important to me – there are many pathways to this sort of critical self-awareness. However, without it technical skill is worthless. Nobody gets it right at the design phase – there are always unknowns and unexpected outcomes. I tell people that research proposals only tell me that you know how to think through research…which is important, as when you reach the field reality will intrude and you will have to rethink the whole project. Those who can do this will always do better work. After that general skill, I would suggest that the ability to think integratively is the next most important thing. You can be a subject area expert – great if you are – but you need to think about how what you know and worry about impacts things that other people know and worry about. The failure to think integratively (or in an interdisciplinary way, in academia) does in a lot of projects, and limits the utility of a lot of smart people…find a team of people working across boundaries, intellectual or physical, and work with them: you will have the foundation of an important skill set”.

Do not despair if this list intimidates you. The competencies listed by my colleagues above are developmental; they can be learned, practiced and grown. And, if you are ever feeling dissatisfied with where you are professionally, reach our to your peers and seek to ways to develop your competencies. And, always remember Marvin, the Paranoid Android: “Here I am, brain the size of a planet, and they ask me to take you to the bridge. Call that job satisfaction, ’cause I don’t”.

What do you think is the most important competency needed?

This post originally appeared and is a cross-post with AidBoard

Well, mostly free. There are also VIP tickets available for purchase, ranging from $189.50 to $249.50. Ability to attend seems be structured just like development interventions: either you pay for the service/product (in this case, a concert) or you are given free access to the service/product (in this case, a concert).

This is an awareness-raising initiative, primarily organised by the Global Poverty Project (GPP). It coincides with the 67th regular session of the United Nations, which begins on 18th September in New York. According to a feature from the The Washington Times, Hugh Evans

“hopes the chance to see some of rock’s biggest acts will spur fans to take 100,000 actions by September. The overall goal is to raise $500 million in practical solutions by leveraging commitments from the world’s leaders while they’re in New York”.

100,000 actions. Although this may sound like just another aid concert, there is an inventive twist. First, the 54,000 free tickets will be drawn from a lottery. Second, to be eligible for the lottery, you have to go to http://www.globalcitizen.org, sign-up and earn “3 points”. I decided to sign-up, and see what actions I would have to take to earn three points and be eligible for the lottery.

The first thing I noticed on the sign-up page was this peculiar image:

It stands to reason that “polio eradication” is highlighted as the first element. The GPP have become a very visible and vocal advocate for the eradication of polio in recent years. The “more to come” element is peculiar, and most of the “elements” are not elements at all. For example, “Fight Corruption” is an action and “Primary Education” should perhaps read “No access to Primary Education”.

I earned one point for signing-up and entering my details. However, it is only optional to state “Why are you a Global Citizen.” Phew. I have enough trouble writing cover letters for job applications.  Next, I started to earn points through more actions. First, I shared “Malaria: the facts” on my Twitter account.

Two points.

Second, I shared a short UNICEF brief on child mortality, “UNICEF working to decrease child mortality rates,” on Facebook.

Three points.

I immediately received an email telling me that I am in the draw with one ticket. All completed in five minutes. However, if I wanted to increase my chances, I need to earn more points. The more points I earn, the more entries into the lottery I receive. For every additional five points I earn, I receive one additional entry. The main way to earn points is to share short issue briefs, infographics, videos; at least, these are the “Most Popular” ways to earn points.

I then read the Terms & Conditions and discovered that with my three points, I am eligible for a prize, which actually consists of two tickets. I was under the impression that I was only eligible for one ticket. Hurrah! I am actually in the running for two tickets. The other, hypothetical ticket I cannot sell, but can give to someone who is not a Global Citizen and didn’t earn their three points. To be eligible, only I have to have sign-up, provided the correct details, and have earned three points. But, then a snag.

“5.5. Entrants from outside of the United States of America are eligible only if they can prove via flight or hotel booking confirmations, that they will be in New York on September 29, 2012.”

So, this is really only open to North American-based Global Citizens unless you happen to be in the U.S/New York at that time (or can afford to fly to New York from elsewhere in the world, which in that case, you should really buy the VIP tickets and not enter the lottery). The cheapest base airfare I could find from Beijing (where I currently live) to New York around the date of the concert is over $1400 return.

Is this just another aid concert or a new form of activism?

The same type of question could be asked of this post: is this just another hypercritical post about an organisation’s fund- and awareness-raising campaign? It is very easy to be quite cynical of this event. It is laughably easy to earn 3 points and receive an entry in the lottery. There is a real danger of these actions only accounting for a warm sense of ‘feeling good’ within people who participate. It is slacktivism, but that is not to say that slacktivism cannot lead to more important activity in the future.

However, it is also a very clever idea that flips the concept of aid concerts, and more broadly how we engage people in activism, on its head. This is no Live Aid. Celebrities are not at the centre, despite the fact that they will be on centre stage. The staff of the GPP are challenging the notion, head on, that good intentions are not enough. I am sure many will earn 3 points just to be in the lottery because they are fans of The Foo Fighters. But, the fact that they have to earn that privilege is revolutionary. To earn the privilege to attend the event almost forces people to take notice, to care, without the carelessness of poor marketing that falls into ‘poverty porn‘.

The difficult aspect is, as always, the effect. What will these actions lead to? I am sure the GPP can track the sharing and determine how many people where reached. My tweet of the malaria infographic was retweeted twice (by backseat_human & dev_in_action). But, what effect will this have on people’s behaviours? Can the ripple effects of my tweet be measured? Some may be tempted to point at the Arab Spring, but this would be a poor analogy and not constitute evidence. This comes back to thinking about the how.

The how of engaging people who want to sign up is paramount in this event, and I feel like the GPP could have improved their concept somewhat. I admire their belief and commitment to the potential of social media and social sharing as a form of change. However, perhaps awarding points for participants donating to certain organisations (1 point for $10, 2 points for $20, etc.) or creating a ladder of engagement, where completing one action unlocks the next level of engagement until all levels are complete (from signing up, to sharing to donating), could be more engaging. However, this is just armchair criticism and I am sure there were long nights and debates about the design amongst the GPP.

The GPP are pushing the utility of social media as a tool for social change and building a broad, grassroots coalition. What will be the most critical part of this event, and what will probably “make a difference”, will be the ability of the global coalition to leverage their political and social klout around polio eradication to secure $500 million from national governments during the 67th regular session of the United Nations.

Update 21 August 2012

I did it. My name went into the lottery and I earned two tickets to the Global Festival. I can’t begin to tell you how strange this all is. If I don’t claim my tickets in seven days, they will be returned to the lottery. However, I can transfer them, even to people who are not ‘Global Citizens’ and have not earned their tickets. So, I transfered my tickets to a friend, who is a Global Citizen and lives in NY, but on a couple of conditions that I laid out. You will hear more on this later.

In response to this post, the folks over at GPP (or at least those on the GPP’s Twitter accounts for the festival and the platform) said that more actions are forthcoming and that the ‘Elements of Extreme Poverty’ image will be reviewed.

(1) World Bank national development strategies in key emerging markets have failed miserably in the Olympics sector.

(2) a history of Communism may not have been so awesome for development and liberty, but it’s still amazing for Olympic medals.

(3) Islamist ideology is a mixed medal producer (Saudi Arabia no, Iran yes).

(4) if nothing else works, just run really fast.

Like any good Development Economist, Easterly only looks at GDP and total number of medals. He forgets a very important fact about the Olympics: only gold medals matter. The medal tally is not ranked on total number of medals. It is ranked on total number of gold medals. And, we know how American athletes feel about silver:

So, lets have a look at what determines Olympic gold medals (which are not really gold, and only contain 1.34% gold) and go beyond GDP to look at ‘Human Development‘. The first image is the medal tally according to gold medals. The second image is the Human Development Index (HDI) ranking. Only the top 24 countries are displayed.

The results find a weak correlation between ‘Human Development’ (GDP, life expectancy at birth, mean years of schooling, expected years of schooling) and the ability to win events that people only watch once every fours years. However, the results also support Easterly’s finding that running really fast works. Also, lifting really heavy things, shooting and being in or on water work as well.

Other not so important observations:

• Only 10 countries in the top 24 HDI rankings can be found in the top 24 medal tally.
• no.14 Iran ranks no.88 in the HDI; no.16 North Korea does not ranks due to insufficient data; no.17 Jamaica ranks no.79 in the HDI.
• Only one country from the British Isles, Ireland, ranks in the top 24 for ‘human development’. The United Kingdom sits at no.28 in the HDI.
• Countries currently affected by the Eurozone crisis, although not ranking too well in the medal tally, are still holding ground in the HDI: Italy, Spain, and Germany. This suggests that Italy and Spain should increase funding of its national sports and athletics programs, while cutting back on health and education.
• In no way are these findings to be taken seriously.

To date, we have received over 330 positive responses to a peer coaching initiative. This prompted the team at WhyDev to begin a crowdfunding campaign at Start Some Good. With only 7 days to go, we have raised over $4,000 thanks to 63 generous supporters. This amount will ensure that we get the pilot peer coaching program off the ground and running effectively. However, if we can reach the full funding target of $10,000, we will be able to ensure the long-term viability and sustainability of a peer coaching program.

In a recent interview I gave to Jaclyn Schiff of Pangea, I revealed some of the intriguing results of the survey. Now, in the lead up to the end of the crowdfunding campaign and the beginnings of the pilot program, we would like to share the full results of this survey.

Gender
	Male 94 28% Female 242 72% Transgender 1 0%

Age
	Below 18 1 0% 18 to 25 73 22% 26 to 35 184 55% 36 to 45 52 15% Over 45 27 8%

Years of work in international development (either in the field or head office)
	Less than 1 64 19% 2 94 28% 3 49 15% 4 32 9% 5 17 5% 6 14 4% 7 11 3% 8 7 2% 9 3 1% 10 7 2% 11 to 15 19 6% 16 to 20 7 2% More than 20 13 4%

Field of work

Agriculture 28 8% Climate Change and Environment 19 6% Disability 3 1% Disaster Management 8 2% Education 34 10% Food and Nutrition 14 4% Gender 10 3% HIV/Aids 7 2% Health 45 13% Humanitarian Financing 5 1% Logistics and Telecommunications 4 1% Peacekeeping and Peacebuilding 10 3% Protection and Human Rights 16 5% Recovery and Reconstruction 4 1% Safety and Security Safety and Security 1 0% Shelter and Non-Food Items 2 1% Water Sanitation Hygiene 12 4% Other (please specify below) 115 34%

Peer coaching is likely to bring several potential benefits, each of varying importance. On the scale below each answer, please tell us how important you think each benefit is to you. – Discussions related to a career in international development
	Not important at all 2 1% Somewhat unimportant 9 3% Neutral 28 8% Somewhat important 105 31% Very important 191 57%

Peer coaching is likely to bring several potential benefits, each of varying importance. On the scale below each answer, please tell us how important you think each benefit is to you. – Troubleshooting work-based challenges in my current job
	Not important at all 3 1% Somewhat unimportant 11 3% Neutral 38 11% Somewhat important 122 36% Very important 160 47%

Peer coaching is likely to bring several potential benefits, each of varying importance. On the scale below each answer, please tell us how important you think each benefit is to you. – Research, sector-specific (e.g. education, health, etc.) discussions
	Not important at all 2 1% Somewhat unimportant 21 6% Neutral 48 14% Somewhat important 156 46% Very important 102 30%

Peer coaching is likely to bring several potential benefits, each of varying importance. On the scale below each answer, please tell us how important you think each benefit is to you. – Moral or emotional support from somebody in a similar situation
	Not important at all 2 1% Somewhat unimportant 20 6% Neutral 69 20% Somewhat important 123 36% Very important 120 36%

Peer coaching is likely to bring several potential benefits, each of varying importance. On the scale below each answer, please tell us how important you think each benefit is to you. – General chit chat
	Not important at all 22 7% Somewhat unimportant 70 21% Neutral 102 30% Somewhat important 111 33% Very important 22 7%

How would you like to interact with your peer coach (more than one answer can be chosen)?
	Skype 256 76% Email 225 67% Face to face 119 35% Other 39 12% People may select more than one checkbox, so percentages may add up to more than 100%.

Ideally, how often would you like to interact with your peer coach?
	More than once a week 4 1% Once a week 92 27% Once every few weeks 216 64% Once every few months 20 6% Less than once every few months. 1 0%

Yet, my professional identity is another matter, found elsewhere and not so clear. It has been a rough two weeks. A depression. I look upon my professional life as an archaeologist would the cross-section of a trench, with each layer quite distinct, representing certain periods of time, settlement and abandonment. However, the cross-sections are anything but clear. Artefacts from seemingly different time periods are to be found in the same layer. There are visible signs of destruction. But, most of all, there is a entire landscape of unanswered (and sometimes, unanswerable) questions. I have found it hard to keep my role in focus here. I am in a long-distance relationship. My professional future is uncertain. My current professional life is uncertain, ill-conceived. My role is largely determined by how I perceive myself as a professional and a worker. But, I am unsure how I see my professional self. It is perhaps a result of looking into the future, of trying to determine where I will be or want to be next. What do I want my role to be? Who do I want to work for? How can I get there? This focus on the future, I think, is leading away from what I am doing now.

I am tempted to use the “we” in writing this reflection, to have the arrogance to speak for all aid and development workers. Rather, I want to reflect on my personal experience, and allow you to respond and speak for yourself. A kind of group therapy, because although I may feel alone in having this swirling uncertainty of professional identity, I know I am not alone.

I try to separate my online identity from my professional one and keep my work quite separate from my engagement with issues and people online. I don’t want either to define me. Part of it is self-interest. I believe that my contribution to this site, and my connections with others, will support my professional career either indirectly or directly. However, I don’t believe that my online engagement will change how I professionally work. I do not want to get caught in the rhetoric and polemic. This is probably why I decided to collect and collate posts on #Kony2012, rather than write about it.

I enjoy the intellectual stimulation of online engagement, but think it naive to believe my perspectives will change people, prejudices, paradigms. Is Dr. Kim a good choice for the World Bank Presidency? What should a post-2015 agenda look like? How are the BRICs reshaping the aid system? I enjoy reading about such, and occasionally add my own or engage others online (and off), but to what effect? Social media and blogging is more of a way for me to socially and intellectually connect with others. Social media allows for this; power does reside within it, in the people who use it. Sometimes, I want to display my intellectual prowess and cunning, or try to be humourous. But, ultimately, I am engaging in these activities to connect with others (and probably, more often than not, to put others in their place).

To think that social media will give me the power to challenge orthodoxy is arrogant. To believe that I can challenge in my professional life is also foolhardy. I am not an Amartya Sen or Ester Duflo, nor a Scott Gilmore or William Easterly. I enjoy research and see my career heading down this pathway, with a hope to make my research applicable and participatory, and not purely academic or esoteric. I believe I have the smarts for it, without being brilliant; I have a good education, a critical mind with technical knowledge and expertise, some modest publications and a variety of foundational employment experiences. My moral and ethical compass points due justice, but gets knocked around by the magnetic forces of universalism and utilitarianism. I find snark and cynicism easy bed companions that feed off each other, but unhelpful in trying to develop my professional identity. I think they would corrode it. I try to practice being mindful, and believe this can support and shape my professional work. Reflexivity can be learned, is of undiscovered value, but is perhaps the hardest to practice.

I think these online engagements distract from trying to define my professional identity. I lose concentration from constantly checking Facebook, Twitter, updating statuses, sending tweets, trying to achieve enlightenment in 140 characters or less. Rather, I am beginning to understand that my professional identity will be defined in the work I do each day. In my application of concentration and discipline. In the conversations I have face-to-face with colleagues, friends, family, neighbours and those we work with – call them partners, beneficiaries, locals, nationals, participants. Society in humanity has, and will, always be defined by social connections and interactions, the most important being face-to-face, person-to-person. This is not a ground-breaking insight, but it is significant for me to remember. Without it, I have no professional identity.

I know that if I can define the limits of my professional identity, about what I can achieve, then I will be satisfied, productive. It is not a case of balancing idealism with realism and vice versa. It is about understanding who I am, what I am capable of, and how I can be. Idealism and realism are just concepts that others attach to my professional identity. They too are distracting. In writing this reflection, this is the list of things I uncovered about my professional identity, a real-time archaeology of my professional identity:

I want to create.

I want to share knowledge and enable others to uncover it.

I don’t want to save the world, but I do want to support the people within it.

I want to contribute, not necessarily in a way that is quantifiable, but in a way that is satisfactory to my own standards and which is at least tangible.

It is ok to look towards my own professional and personal self-interests. I want a family, I want a home, and can look towards securing such.

But, perhaps the most significant realisation I am coming to is this: that professionally, I am no more special, unique or necessary than any one person. My contribution, my role, is just as important as that of an electrician, plumber, taxi driver, janitor, lawyer, nurse, radio host, small business owner. We are all providing a service in some way, under the pretense of different reasons. Although I may believe my service to be more selfless, noble and even of a higher calling, this is just not true. We all provide these services for the same reasons: livelihood, security, and need.

And I’ve also realised that if I truly want to make a difference, then I should be a teacher again, for there is no other profession in which you can have a more direct effect on the lives of children and families than in teaching.

Seven Components

Results and relevance
1. Delivering results on poverty and sustainable development in line with mandate
2. Alignment with Australia’s aid priorities and national interests
3. Contribution to the wider multilateral development system

Organisational behaviour
4. Strategic management and performance
5. Cost and value consciousness
6. Partnership behaviour
7. Transparency and accountability

The Winners

Thirteen agencies and development banks were rated as very strong or strong across most (at least six) of the seven AMA components and not rated as weak against any component. “With these organisations, the Australian Government can have a high degree of confidence that increases in core funding will deliver tangible development benefits in line with Australia’s development objectives, and that the investment will represent good value for money”. These are:

• Asian Development Bank
• Climate Investment Funds
• GAVI Alliance
• Global Crop Diversity Trust
• Global Environment Facility
• Global Partnership for Education (GPE)
• International Committee of the Red Cross
• International Finance Corporation
• Multilateral Fund for the Implementation of the Montreal Protocol
• Private Infrastructure Development Group
• UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
• World Bank
• World Food Programme (WFP)

What is critical to note, though, is that the World Bank received $505 million or about 1/3 of Australia’s total ODA to multilateral agencies in 2010-11. The next four largest are the Asian Development Bank, UNICEF, WFP, and UNDP. Funding to these five totaled over $1 billion (of a total of $1.6 billion allocated to multilaterals in 2010-11). Most of the allocations are tagged as ‘Non-core funding’, which means that the money is earmarked (tied) for a particular purpose, usually arranged by managers of country and sector programmes.

The Biggest Losers

Five agencies are rated as weak on at least one component and according to the assessment, “further analysis is required before decisions are made on core funding levels”. These are:

• Commonwealth Secretariat Development Programmes
• Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
• UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
• UN Human Settlements Programme
• UN Mine Action Service

Some interesting snapshots from the assessment: what else you need to know

• The Global Fund was only rated at least satisfactory on every one of the seven components, but well behind 29 other agencies, which were rated higher.
• There will be an annual assessment of Australia’s multilateral partners, with a scorecard released every August, including a focus on effectiveness at the country-level.
• There is considerable variation in the effectiveness of many multilateral agencies at the country-level. That is, some perform well in some countries but poorly in others.
• ‘Value for money’ is key priority for AusAID, as it is for DfiD. Although, exactly what ‘value’ means and who the ‘value’ is for, are uncertain.

Recent research has found that foreign aid has failed to reduce inequalities in some recipient countries, and it is significant to note that equity is not a strategic goal of AusAID. However, “saving lives” and “promoting opportunities for all” (vague, in the vaguest sense of the word) are. As the global aid system shifts, particularly around the presence of Brazil, Russia, India and China, and as issues increasingly become complex and interconnected (or rather, our recognition of such becomes more apparent), it will be interesting to watch how national aid agencies such as AusAID define, measure and justify such goals. “Saving lives” lends itself to quantifiable data, and is good marketing for the Australian public, but “effective governance” and “sustainable economic development” are a little more murky. This is made more acute by the nature of multilateral agencies and the challenges of effective performance and results-based management (value for money) across myriad different countries and contexts. Add another layer of “in national interests”, and it would appear very difficult for national aid agencies to respond adequately to global, national and community-level challenges.

AID/WATCH, an independent membership-based watchdog on Australian aid, trade and debt, has released an alternate multilateral assessment of four agencies. The organisation looked at four holistic indicators that speak to their ability to end global poverty and take actions of relevance to the global poor. According to AID/WATCH, their review assessed:

1. Human Development – what is the agencies development approach and how relevant is their mandate to human development?
2. Ecological Impact – ecology is the long overlooked development challenge whilst at the same time “greenwashing” is on the increase. Does the agency commit to conservation or just talk about it?
3. Working with the Poor – too often, agencies work on behalf of the poor, without ever asking them. Does this agency genuinely work with poor people and their organisations on issues of importance to them?
4. Development Politics – Where does the agency stand on fundamental issues such as the trickle-down effect, neoliberalism and the politics of development?

You can access and download AID/WATCH’s assessment below. The World Bank and Asian Development Bank represent the single largest channel for Australian aid, some 17% of total ODA. In contrast, the ILO and FAO both received heavy criticism from DfiD in its own multilateral review last year.

• Asian Development Bank (.pdf)
• Food and Agricultural Organization (.pdf)
• International Labor Organization (.pdf)
• World Bank (.pdf)

“The purpose of these frameworks is not to recommend one multilateral agency over another, but to illustrate the complexities of rigid ranking systems and the variety of factors that influence multilateral agencies. AusAID must consider each multilateral agency on its own merits”. (AID/WATCH)

Given the recent rumours of the government’s plans to renege on Australia’s promise to boost the aid budget to 0.5% of GDP by 2015, it is quite peculiar that it comes during the same week as the release of this assessment. Organisations such as Global Poverty Project, World Vision Australia and others are are expressing caution and concern, but are perhaps missing an opportunity. This assessment and rumour present an opportunity to demonstrate and leverage the effectiveness of Australian aid. The conversation should not focus solely on the volume of aid, but its effective allocation, through multilateral agencies or otherwise, in achieving development objectives and goals.