Thirdly, not all countries that receive shoes or clothes are producing them locally and most of the apparel manufactured in poor countries is made by exporting multinationals, therefore, not consumed locally. In order for aid to actually be effective data need to be collected, feedback needs to be heard, and impacts need to be measured. live: hurricane maria tracker 175mph CAT 5-Warning!/hurricane jose tracker/Weather channel Live HD! The concern that aid that goes directly to corrupt governments often does very little in the lives of the poor and (perhaps) makes the whole situation worse by weakening “the social contract” between governments and their electorate. An academic study shows that in-kind transfers do not harm local purchases. Poverty Inc. is a film that, on the surface, offers to reveal the development “industry” for the cabal of self-interested, ineffective charlatans it is. approximated by the rate of established business ownership, international patent law is another structural factor with dire implications for ART (antiretroviral therapy) in resource-poor settings, http://trenz.today/whats-wrong-with-poverty-inc-a-critical-review/, Videos Show Migrant Children Being Slapped, Dragged At Since-Shuttered Arizona Shelter, John Kelly Blames Jeff Sessions For Family Separation Policy: ‘He Surprised Us’, Microsoft Allowed Super Mario Bros. to be Illegally Sold on Their Store, The Ancient Aliens Theory Explained By Erich Von Daniken April 2015. A class analysis would not, for instance, stress that “NGOs need the poor to exist” but that “the rich need the poor to exist”. What are, then, the problems with this documentary? Poverty, Inc. is a new documentary that draws attention to the flaws in the modern global aid and development industry. One must keep in mind that most of the world income is concentrated in a few Northern countries and is virtually impossible to have a world where all the countries are rich. Three economists from the University of San Francisco performed such a study and recently published it in the peer-reviewed Journal of Development Effectiveness. The West has positioned itself as the protagonist of the development narrative.
Change ). The dominant arguments in the documentary are those from the Austrian school and from “new” institutionalism, both of which argue that the main development problems in poor countries are their poor rule of law and lack of property rights. In its own words, the film ... in the sand and carry on like you’ve always done – neither are helpful. When Food for the Poor constructed houses in a desolated and rural area such as Saltadere (Haiti) for poor families (which put wealth in hands of these families), does that discourage any local producers? Before smallpox was eradicated it killed a recorded 300 million people globally. approximated by the rate of established business ownership, international patent law is another structural factor with dire implications for ART (antiretroviral therapy) in resource-poor settings, Heartwarming Father-Son Pics Flood Internet After Troll Calls Biden Photo ‘Creepy’, ‘Borat 2’ Includes A Deep Burn About The Trudeau Brownface Scandal, Thank You, Le Château, For The Questionable Fashion Moments That United Us, How Blake Lively’s 'Shoes' Almost Overshadowed Ryan Reynolds’ Voting PSA, Man Etches Hate Graffiti Into Tomb Of The Unknown Soldier In Ottawa, Conservative MP Flashes Middle Finger, Plays Coy When Asked To Apologize, These Scary Movie Scenes Will Haunt You Forever. Besides mentioning supranational entities, the documentary did not expose crucial structural problems: there is no serious analysis on geopolitics, global power relations, or class issues, among others. Did China become a neoliberal state or strongly protect intellectual property (a sign of good institutions for these schools of thought)? I believe that solidarity is better than indifference, and that the ultimate causes of poverty are in the structure of the system, not in the few people that are trying to counteract the system with their available tools. Physicians working for $1,000 per month with Doctors Without Borders in very endangered places in Syria and Sudan are anonymous heroes that give up a comfortable life in their home countries and that may earn less than people associated to this documentary. Sports, politics, entertainment and celebrities.

Secondly, the documentary mixed foreign aid with all kinds of NGOs to state that NGOs do “more harm than good” because by gifting food or clothes they are harming local producers. It is exceedingly dangerous to only consider aid spending that has not lead to the reduction of poverty while disregarding the aid spending that actually does produce worthwhile results. Inserted into the figure above, direct cash transfers create a line of little green arrows from the yellow group of people (presumably rich people) directly to the red and orange people (the “people in poverty”). In reality, it’s a grossly over simplified plod through some pretty well established criticisms of certain areas of development work that tars everyone with the same brush. No. Since its eradication, in 1973, roughly 100 million lives have been saved. Shoe donations (and aid, in general) ought to be targeted to those who actually need it. Suppose, just for the time being, that all forms of aid had no benefits except for aiding in the eradication of smallpox. A Critical Review As a development economist, I share here my views on the famous documentary “Poverty, Inc.” On the positive side, the documentary does a good job in making some points for an audience unfamiliar with economic development, such as the idea that dependency does not end poverty, or… Without a global government that taxes the rich countries and redistributes to poor countries, some of the existing channels available for redistributing income are: receiving remittances, exporting more than importing from the North, and attracting foreign transfers, among others. Take the case of Puerto Rico, a colony subject to the“strong” U.S. legal system, where entrepreneurship (approximated by the rate of established business ownership) is weaker than in Peru and Guatemala, countries often criticized for having weak institutions. As demonstrated by the case of TOMS Shoes, well-developed theory and sound logic can only provide so much clarity about what will work and what won’t in various contexts. This explanation uses well-developed theoretical economic logic: local shoe businesses can’t compete with free, so when shoes are given away for free the local shoe market suffers.

Change ), You are commenting using your Google account. But the results have been mixed, in some cases even catastrophic, and developing world leaders have become increasingly vocal in calling for change. It is perhaps natural for us to want to live a (fictional) world where we know we know how things work. This is a real concern, but the film doesn’t share much in terms of rigorous evidence. By providing superficial recommendations and pointing fingers at the wrong factors, I believe that this documentary does “more harm than good”. ABSTRACT. Through organizations like Give Directly you can send money from your bank account directly to the mobile money (i.e. Take the case of Puerto Rico, a colony subject to the“strong” U.S. legal system, where entrepreneurship (approximated by the rate of established business ownership) is weaker than in Peru and Guatemala, countries often criticized for having weak institutions. What’s Wrong With 'Poverty, Inc.'? Furthermore, second-hand clothes are one of the few items that Haitian farmers can sell (to complement their produce sales) to Dominicans in the binational market (a one-day free market that takes place every week in the frontier between these countries). ( Log Out /  Innovation requires high quality education, but many rural areas in many poor countries do not even have a free university or free secondary schools for the poor. What’s Wrong With 'Poverty, Inc.'? Sports, politics, entertainment and celebrities. One thought on “ Poverty Inc Critique Article & Discussion ” Laura Hollis on February 6, 2018 at 1:28 pm said: Great find, and a wonderful piece to prompt discussion! Another example is when the documentary shows innovators from developing countries without acknowledging that they were among the few privileged residents of these countries that could receive a good education. When aid is spent well, even with numerous failures, the benefits may still outweigh the costs using typical cost-benefit practices.

These include: By raising awareness of these flaws in the global aid system, this film deserves appreciation, as these issues are presented in a clear and meaningful fashion. No mention is made of “old” institutionalism that can help the poor countries such as global labor standards and a global framework for debt restructuring, among others.

Do economies with “strong” institutions have higher entrepreneurship levels than economies with weak institutions? Innovation requires high quality education, but many rural areas in many poor countries do not even have a free university or free secondary schools for the poor. Change ), You are commenting using your Twitter account. They find no statistically significant effects on the local labor market, in rural El Salvador, due to the donations of TOMS Shoes. He is a graduate of Calvin College. In the case of shoes, those who donate shoes should be careful not to give shoes to people who would otherwise pay the going market price for shoes. For example, consider the case of the eradication of smallpox around the world. Poverty Inc. is unsparing in its criticism of efforts by rich countries to help the global poor, implying that they remain stuck in old, broken paradigms that not only don’t work, but often make matters worse. Poverty Inc. bills itself as a film unearthing the uncomfortable side of charity. These transfers of income should be stopped in the name of economic development. Many. For instance, instead of bringing food from abroad, use that money to buy food locally, enhancing the weak aggregate demand that many battered economies have.

NGOs and local states can work together to provide higher access to education. Another example is when the documentary shows innovators from developing countries without acknowledging that they were among the few privileged residents of these countries that could receive a good education. The dominant arguments in the documentary are those from the Austrian school and from “new” institutionalism, both of which argue that the main development problems in poor countries are their poor rule of law and lack of property rights.
According to the movie Poverty, Inc. voluntary contributions to inhabitants of poor countries from church and other such groups hurt the recipients instead of helping them. Shared Justice is an initiative of the Center for Public Justice. No. I agree with the documentary that higher entrepreneurship is needed to develop nations, but the means to create a solid entrepreneurial capacity are far beyond just “property rights.” In fact, one can argue that excessive property rights can make “more harm than good” in poor countries: the literature has found that how intellectual property has affected public health and that, “international patent law is another structural factor with dire implications for ART (antiretroviral therapy) in resource-poor settings”. It is rather stunning that a documentary about the modern aid and development industry left out the topic of direct cash transfers as discussions have been exceedingly common in recent years, not only among so-called development experts, but also in the media, for example: The New York Times, The Economist, Bloomberg Business, Forbes, The Economist (again), Foreign Affairs, The New York Times (again), NPR's Planet Money, The Huffington Post, and The Atlantic.