This is a guest post from TJCC regular contributor Stephanie Finigan. You can follow Stephanie on Twitter at @StephFini.
It has been almost a month since the United Nations declared that Somalia and the surrounding areas are in the midst of a full-blown famine. Since then, it has been nearly impossible to escape the devastating images coming out of that region of the world. The US government has estimated that 30,000 children have died already due to this crisis – and that number is expected to grow exponentially in the coming weeks.
These statistics and images are made all the more infuriating by the fact that this famine was seen coming for months in advance by major international aid groups – yet no real action was taken until the UN officially declared a “famine” on August 3rd, sending the international aid community – and the entire world – into a panic, scrambling to get funds, food, and supplies to those in need, only after the situation had already deteriorated so badly.
So the question has to be asked: If this crisis was seen coming from so far away why did the world wait so long to help?
While there are serious political factors that could be blamed for the delays in response to this crisis, the reality is that in general the international aid community operates very much in a state of “reaction” instead of “prevention”. Rather than spend the time and resources to attempt to prevent a disaster such as this one in Somalia, the international community largely waits until a crisis has reached a severe state before aggressive action is taken. The reason for this tendency to operate in a mode of “reaction” comes down to dollars – international aid organizations rely on donors in order to keep operations running. And the fact is that a typical donor would be more likely to make a donation to an organization that is helping a starving child on the street, than to an organization that is working to prevent a healthy child from one day possibly getting sick.
Exactly why we tend to think this way is unclear, though there are those who believe it is actually part of the human psyche to focus on acting on what is immediately in front of us, versus on what is in the future and we cannot actually see – a concept known as measuring the “discount rate of impulsivity”. I am not a psychologist, however examples of this kind of thinking are pervasive in my own life. Though I wouldn’t call myself a procrastinator, I have certainly heard a funny noise coming from my car, or felt an ache in my tooth, and chosen to “deal with it later” – knowing full well that my delay in taking action will likely result in the problem getting worse over time.
When the problem we are not proactively addressing is something like the funny noise coming from our car, this kind of “I’ll deal with it later” approach can be justified. However, when our culture has reached a point where we can predict that a humanitarian crisis is likely to occur, and we still choose to not take action, then we really need to stop and try to figure out what we can do to change this way of thinking.
Going forward, the world of international aid and development needs a new strategy of operating: one of “preventative development.” Focusing on prevention of a crisis will save far more lives than waiting for that crisis to happen and trying to address needs then – in a state of urgency, panic, and overwhelming numbers. But this shift in action will not happen unless there are the dollars to support it. No aid organization can work on “preventive” measures – whether trying to prevent the spread disease, malnutrition, or related issues – unless they have the funding to do so.
And this is where you and I come in.
Looking beyond the immediate crisis in Somalia (where we should be taking action right now), and ahead to the months and years to come, the most impactful thing we can do is vote with our dollars and support organizations working through proactive means to prevent crisis. Partners in Health (http://www.pih.org)is an example of a great organization focused on disease prevention and health issues in the developing world. Along the same lines, organizations focused on issues of sanitation and clean water, such as Charity Water (http://www.charitywater.org), or UNICEF’s Tap Project (http://www.tapproject.org), are very much “prevention” focused in their work, as providing a basic need such as clean water is essential to preventing a number of life-threatening illnesses in any community.
By supporting organizations that are focused on prevention, people like you and me are helping to take a step towards creating a world where “preventive development’” is the norm – and where 30,000 children do not need to die from lack of hunger in a place like Somalia before the world decides to take action.
