Locked latrines, meat offsetting and development apps

I just spent an enthralling couple of days at a get together of Oxfam GB’s country directors (CDs). A combination of group discussions and speed-dating as I talked to as many as possible of the incredibly impressive people who are on Oxfam’s frontline, lobbying ministers and officials, consulting poor communities and doing (lots of) management stuff. I picked up some examples of effective development work that I’ll highlight over the coming weeks, but here’s a few initial impressions and stories, with countries edited out just in case.

Climate change: it was striking what a mainstream part of aid work climate change adaptation and advocacy have become. Everyone seems to be doing it. Remarkable shift in just the last few years.

Driving implementation: several conversations about how, as countries have got increasingly involved in policy work, many have concluded that you can get more bangs for your advocacy buck by focussing on implementation of existing legislation, rather than demanding nice new laws that no-one takes any notice of. As one CD from Central Asia observed: ‘the elite know how to handle the expat aid consultants. You make sure they come in, employ senior civil servants, buy a new law and can declare success. Then the expat moves on and nothing changes.’

And some stories, good and bad, (and all completely unscientific and anecdotal):

In the Pakistan floods one of the reasons why people are reluctant to move to camps is fear of losing their land. People are clinging on as near as possible to their submerged plots, so that they can get back there as soon as possible when the waters recede. A stark example of the links between land rights and humanitarian work.

Ever struggled to explain the difference between outputs and outcomes? Try this. One CD in latrineWest Africa came upon a beautiful new row of shiny latrines. Padlocked. Why? ‘We wanted to keep them clean.’ Nice output (latrines) shame about the outcome (health).

In the Middle East we are doing some fascinating research on men and boys, and their attitudes to women’s rights and violence against women. What power are men willing to give up? Generally, no problems with women getting an education or a job, but complete opposition to adultery (by women, that is) or going out without permission – a man has to know at all times where his wife is. And two surprises – men don’t necessarily make better interviewers of other men, and violence often begins with mothers (not fathers) beating their sons.

And two whacky ideas:

cowsWe know that carnivores emit more carbon (loads more grain needed to produce a kilogram of beef than a kilo of, ermm, grain) and that levels of meat consumption are far greater in the rich countries. But vegetarianism by decree is never going to fly. Obvious solution? Meat offsetting. If I want a steak, I need to compensate someone in a developing country who is going to suffer the consequences, and probably eats a lot less meat than I do.

And as iPhones or similar 3 and 4G gizmos (I’m vague on the details) spread across the developing world, what would an Oxfam app look like? GPS tools for small farmers to help them reduce fertilizer or pesticide use? Ushahidi-style crowd sourcing for activists? All suggestions welcome.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. For information about our privacy practices, please see our Privacy Policy.

We use MailChimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to MailChimp for processing. Learn more about MailChimp's privacy practices here.


2 Responses to “Locked latrines, meat offsetting and development apps”
  1. It’s striking, too, how climate change has dropped off the agenda in rich countries, isn’t it? All that talk and money has resulted in countless development programmes, changes in developing country government policy and far too little change (or even debate) in the formal politics of rich countries. It’s as if climate change has killed off the urgency of tackling questions such as water and energy use in the post-industrial world. Bring on the MDGs for the top billion proposed in today’s post: things people have to do, rather than ask for.

  2. Nicholas Colloff

    The surprise at women as the instigators of violence against their children, especially their sons, is surprising. It is axiomatic in feminist revisions of Freud that women in ‘confined social spaces’ invest all their ambitions/hopes in their sons’ fuure prospects. They, thus, both potentially suffocate and spur them on: a dynamic in which violence born of frustration is a real possibility. Dorothy Dinnerstein (in The Mermaid and the Minotaur) and Clara Thompson are both good on this.

Leave a Reply

Your e-mail address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.