Given the golden jubilee of the poem, I thought it fitting to re-introduce it to our community. You may ponder about its relevance today:
Excuse me, friends, I must catch my jet
I’m off to join the Development Set;
My bags are packed, and I’ve had all my shots
I have traveller’s checks and pills for the trots!
The Development Set is bright and noble
Our thoughts are deep and our vision global;
Although we move with the better classes
Our thoughts are always with the masses.
In Sheraton Hotels in scattered nations
We damn multi-national corporations;
injustice seems easy to protest
In such seething hotbeds of social rest.
We discuss malnutrition over steaks
And plan hunger talks during coffee breaks.
Whether Asian floods or African drought,
We face each issue with open mouth.
We bring in consultants whose circumlocution
Raises difficulties for every solution —
Thus guaranteeing continued good eating
By showing the need for another meeting.
The language of the Development Set
Stretches the English alphabet;
We use swell words like “epigenetic”
“Micro”, “macro”, and “logarithmetic”
It pleasures us to be esoteric —
It’s so intellectually atmospheric!
And although establishments may be unmoved,
Our vocabularies are much improved.
When the talk gets deep and you’re feeling numb,
You can keep your shame to a minimum:
To show that you, too, are intelligent
Smugly ask, “Is it really development?”
Or say, “That’s fine in practice, but don’t you see:
It doesn’t work out in theory!”
A few may find this incomprehensible,
But most will admire you as deep and sensible.
Development set homes are extremely chic,
Full of carvings, curios, and draped with batik.
Eye-level photographs subtly assure
That your host is at home with the great and the poor.
Enough of these verses – on with the mission!
Our task is as broad as the human condition!
Just pray god the biblical promise is true:
The poor ye shall always have with you.
Well, nothing much seem to have changed. The aid industry is still trying to work itself out of the job. Except that traveller cheques have been replaced by the Visa Gold Card.
But wait. Technology has become better. Here are two new verses to bring the "The Development Set"up to speed:
Fifty years have passed us by,
Now cell phones help us testify.
We selfie, tweet and LinkedIn post
The meetings where we saved the host.
Our messages proclaim success,
Our photographs confirm progress,
We’ve never been so well connected,
And never less results detected.
As retirees and separatees we finally stopped traveling around the world telling poor countries what they should do and how they should change. Perhaps we should follow Ross Coggin's lead and try to convince the rich countries in which we live to change the policies and behaviors that prevent the poorest nations from prospering.
The image is fake.More Insights from Outside the Bubble, by Detlef Palm
Write to Detlef: detlefpalm55@gmail.com
Perhaps the poem remains relevant because the aid industry is still busy working itself out of a job.
ReplyDeleteDevelopment has become a vast global industry with its own institutions, careers, conferences, consultants, and vocabulary. NGOs are often headed by failed politicians whose Rolodexes are still up to date. Failure does not lead to closure. It produces a new strategy, a larger programme, another conference, and demands for more money.
After fifty years, we should stop claiming that poverty is primarily something rich countries inflict upon poor ones. Rich countries certainly pursue selfish and sometimes damaging policies. But what, exactly, are they doing that forces governments in poor countries to tolerate corruption, destroy institutions, repress enterprise, neglect education, discourage investment, wage wars and allow ruling elites to plunder national wealth?
The truth is that many poor countries are doing a good job of holding themselves back. Countries that established competent governments, protected property, educated their populations, and encouraged enterprise have advanced. Those that did not have remained poor, however much aid they received.
Yet the development establishment continually shifts responsibility elsewhere. Colonialism, capitalism, multinational companies, unfair trade, climate change, and rich-country policies. This may be relevant, but they have also become an inexhaustible supply of excuses. Blaming outsiders is a lot safer than confronting the governments and elites responsible for failure at home.
Our task as retirees should not be to continue telling rich countries that they are the principal cause of poverty. It should be to tell the truth about fifty years of disappointing results.
The final line of Coggins’s poem was not a joke. The continued existence of the poor is the business model, and we have not detected it.
Thanks for this. This poem will continue with many new verses.. A donor report these days now only needs a link to a YouTube clip - of kids in weighing scales smiling after their plump nut. No need to mention the chunk of change that went to the UNRC system or New York or Regional office or country office or zonal office before that dollar landed.
ReplyDeleteAnd I tend to agree with Thomas - the tired excuses of why government don't collect revenue, don't allocate to social sectors, and do allow corruption - is not the fault of development jet set. In most countries I worked in the last 2 decades the percent of national budget coming from external donors in the places I worked is between 1 to 15 % while the rest is mainly domestic revenue collection and tariffs and some loans. Of course the UN share of this tiny slice is a very tiny tiny slice. I hardly think this donor slice has pushed the entire Ministry of Finance into a tail spin of corruption. Nor has whatever legacy of colonialism from 60+ years ago pushed governments into a corner. Sure we need responsible donors and UN agencies and IFIs - but the ultimate responsibility for looking after their own people - is the governments where we have worked. And if they had collected revenue, reigned in corruption and allocated funds to social sectors - they could have told us all to go to hell several decades ago. So why did they let us stay? Why game were they playing?
ReplyDeleteDetlef says, " We should convince the rich countries in which we live to change the policies and behaviors that prevent the poorest nations from prospering." What exactly are these policies and behaviors that need to change? And how come South Korea, Singapore, and Botswana, to take three examples, were not adversely affected by these policies?
ReplyDeleteI hope this will not become yet another missed opportunity. In the run-up to the election next week, I am in daily contact with Swedish politicians from across the political spectrum.
DeleteI would very much like to tell them which policies and behaviours need to change. But frankly, I do not know what those changes should be. I have not the foggiest idea. Please enlighten me.
This is particularly important because, according to the polls, the left is likely to win the election—and it wants Sweden to return to spending 1 per cent of GDP on foreign aid. Unless politicians understand precisely what must change, much of that money may once again be wasted.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSpend that 1% GDP in ODA on public health, girls' education and women's economic empowerment - the only three things that are sure to work, done right. And build local delivery systems and workers' skills as the main focus of that, so you can transition out over 7 - 10 years. And if possible - it's far from easy! - try to leverage that support to incentivize revenue-raising for future funding of these delivery systems. For a start, push governments hard to tax the hell out of poison foods and drinks that make children obese and sick for life.
ReplyDeleteAs for Botswana - yes, it worked for 45 years until world demand for mined diamonds began to collapse. Now the country needs other ways to earn a living, urgently. Luckily it still has a decent and capable government, it seems.