Tuesday, August 7, 2018

HAVE WE NO AGENCY?




It is a common theme among Haitian and those who care about Haiti to reduce the complex and difficult challenges Haiti is facing and lay them at the feet of the International Community (IC) and the International Non Governmental Organizations (INGOs).  The latter term captures international organizations, local NGOs and what we all know as nonprofit organizations but it also includes religious ones and more.  While the terms are different and represent distinctly diverse organizations, for the purpose of brevity I will use NGO to include all organizations from NGOs to nonprofits. 

This paper makes the case that the evolving narrative that NGOs are at the roots of all evils in Haiti is flawed and at best incomplete. It asks the simple question: “have we no agency?” Do we not possess any control over and accountability for ourselves, and over what happens within our sovereign borders?

We also hear the claim that Haiti has over 10,000 NGOs – a number that is neither factual nor official but yet it is accepted as gospel.  In fact, there are less than 600 registered NGOs in Haiti.  However, the narrative is how these thousands of NGOs overtook Haiti, changed our social norms and turned us into beggars who will sell our souls for a kit or a bag of rice.  Undeniably, NGOs do indeed hand out bags of rice but we have somehow selectively forgotten the pictures of past Presidents throwing money to the crowd from their passing cars or current political leaders handing out cash-filled envelopes or bags of rice and plates of food.

While there is much one can contest in the claims about the NGOs role, I want to stay away from the details and focus on the macro level of the problem.  To that end, it would be a fair assessment to say that NGOs have helped expand the divide that had already existed between the Haitian state and its citizens.   For brevity’s sake I will forego our long history and start with the Duvalier regime to illustrate the widening divide.[1].”  This chasm expanded during the American occupation and was pushed further during President Francois Duvalier’s rule.  It broadened over the past 30 years and has resulted in what is today one of the most divided and unequal societies in the world.

We Have Choices: Failing to Use our Agency to Negotiate Better

A number of authors most notably Dambisa Moyo who wrote “Dead Aid” and professor William Easterly in his book “The White Men Burden” posit that the disaggregation and disconnect that is created by NGOs as the primary service providers is not benign but is in fact harmful for the democratic system.   How can a society build and reinforce its norms, and how can the state maintain its legitimacy and demand compliance when it is unable to bring people the basic commodities of goods and services they need?  Though I am mostly in agreement with those critics, I am unwilling to discharge ourselves for the choices we make.

The recent protests of July 6-8 2018 have brought the question of the role of the international community to the center stage, particularly as it relates to the International Monetary Fund (IMF).  In short, the Haitian government negotiated and signed an agreement with the IMF which stipulated that Haiti would reduce its subsidy to the electrical power company (EDH) and increase its revenues by capturing the full profit on the sell of fuel.  In return for these steps and more, Haiti would have gained access to $96 million in grants and loans from the IC.  Despite being warned of the potential impact of such a decision, the Haitian government subsequently decided to increase fuel prices anyway by 38% and 50% respectively on gasoline, diesel and kerosene.   As expected, the country immediately erupted in demonstrations that lasted over three days and resulted in the loss of 24 lives, and the destruction and ransacking of many businesses (amounting in the millions). 

The agreed narrative is that the “blan” (literal translation for a white person but contextually used for any outsider) is manipulating Haiti.  It would reduce this transformative moment and keep the focus on the destruction, ransacking and on Haiti vs. the IMF/IC.  However, the events of July 6-8 have shown a story that is much more complex.  The very act of protesting is itself a confirmation of our agency. It says that we are human beings and when pushed too far we will push back.  The repercussions from this movement are still being felt today. A few weeks after the protests, the country learned of how its limited resources were being wasted and looted by the very elected representatives who were supposed to be looking out for the people’s well being.  Today, the political and economic class are singing different tunes and backing away from previous positions.  A new debate is opened on the issue of corruption and civil society is timidly beginning to ask for justice and accountability. These movements, while timid, are to be lauded and supported.

Our Agency and Governance

I mentioned the word agency a few times already and before going any further, I think it is worthwhile to deconstruct the term to ensure clarity because it essentially grounds my entire argument going forward.  The word agency is defined in social science as “the capacity of individuals to act independently and to make their own free choices. By contrast, structure is those factors of influence (such as social class, religion, gender, ethnicity, ability, customs, etc.) that determine or limit an agent and their decisions.”  Having agency simply means that things do not just happen to us. Instead we feel that we have some level of control and accountability over ourselves.

As I layout my argument against the point of view that claims our powerlessness, I have accepted that I will be labeled as a supporter and enabler of NGOs and a friend of the international community.  Unfortunately, that will have missed the point of this piece.  My thesis here is not to make the case for the goodness of NGOs or international donors.  Instead, it is to hold a mirror to ourselves in order to diagnose our problems so we can we tackle them, and play the game with the cards that we are dealt.

My view is that one of the fundamental problems we face is one of governance, which is essential to development but what exactly is “governance”?  The Webster dictionary defines governance as: the way that a city, company, etc., is controlled by the people who run it.  Some of the synonyms include: administration, care, conduct, control, direction, government, guidance, management, oversight, regulation, stewardship, and supervision.

The emphasis on governance implies the continued and transparent application of rules and practices to manage a business or the affairs of the state.  In the Haitian context it is what President Jovenel Moise identified as the five ills of the country “corruption, corruption, corruption, corruption, and corruption.”  According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), good governance is…

The process whereby public institutions conduct public affairs, manage public resources and guarantee the realization of human rights in a manner essentially free of abuse and corruption, and with due regard for the rule of law. The true test of "good" governance is the degree to which it delivers on the promise of human rights: civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights. The key question is: are the institutions of governance effectively guaranteeing the right to health, adequate housing, sufficient food, quality education, fair justice and personal security?

The argument that centers on blaming the International Community and/or the NGOs for all of Haiti’s ills is certainly easier to make and one that is most likely to get broad affirmation.  This argument lacks nuance and leaves aside the issues of agency and good governance. It leads the reader to conclude that were it not for the IC or the NGOs, Haiti would have progressed.  It would claim the principal reason for the recent uprising of July 6th and 7th was that the people rose up against the overly powerful IMF, which controls our politicians.  That is indeed a powerful argument to make and one that would make any dissenter appear to be defending the IMF and surely appear unpatriotic.  This argument leaves little space for doubt and self-reflection. However, the reality is that, if asked, one would be hard pressed to find a single person who was protesting because of the IMF.  Instead, the people took to the streets to express their frustrations and resentment of the failed political system, and their anger and total rejection of the economic and political establishment.  The convergence of issues that led to July 6th clearly captures John Locke’s argument that “a social contract between a ruler and ruled can be rescinded by the latter if the government takes away property and enslaves people.” In such circumstances, “the People have a right to remove it by force.”

The Flaws of the Anti-NGO Argument

The emotions around the IC/NGO involvement are insidious and make for a powerful concoction that blinds even the clearest eyes and silences dissent. Even President Jovenel has been making the case against the NGOs despite knowing that nearly 60% of investments in Haiti come from said international community often through NGOs.  The President is often seen inaugurating buildings, roads, schools and clinics that are paid for by international donors.  Further, the administration has welcomed, for example, the support of the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB), which has disbursed more than one billion Gourdes (approx. 15 million US dollars) to its most strategic and flagship initiative the “Caravan of Change.”  In that instance the donor is not a culprit.  Ironically, right before the protests the government had been touting the international community’s endorsement of the caravan as proof that it had not only the right strategy to develop Haiti but also as a seal of approval of its good governance.

No matter the context, the problem remains whole and it is the chasm that exists between the state and the people.  To illustrate this point, dissenters have been asking for years that all NGOs leave Haiti. Therefore, I had expected that they would welcome Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) recent closing of the maternity hospital in Delmas 33.  In addition, in the coming months MSF has plans to shut down another hospital – a 122-bed trauma center in Tabarre.  I honestly had expected a celebration of the departure of MSF but there wasn't any. Of course, I understand the dilemma.  We all know that Haiti’s health system is weak.  In the most recent fiscal budget the government allocated less than 6 billion Gourdes to the health sector in contrast to the 7.2 billion Gourdes allocated to the Parliament.  In that same budget they had the following allocations: the Primature (2 billion); the Presidency (1.46 billion); the Ministry of Commerce (1.6 billion); the Ministry of Culture (1.38 billion); the Ministry of the Environment (757 million); the Ministry of Tourism (739 million); the Ministry of Defense (514 million); the Ministry of Communication (350 million); the Ministry of Cults (193 million); the Ministry of Haitians living abroad (127 million).

A 2017 World Bank Group study show that “the annual per capita public health spending in Haiti is $13, compared with $781 in nearby Cuba and $180 in the Dominican Republic.” In fact, only one-fourth of births are attended by a skilled health professional. Most rural areas have no access to health care, making residents susceptible to otherwise treatable diseases.  Given these facts, clearly no one would come out to celebrate the closing of a free round-the-clock maternity hospital. 

How to balance the NGO Relationship

I believe that reasonable people can agree that Haiti needs to wind down its dependency on foreign aid.  However, there are other models of how to engage with the sector to promote our own strategy. The first example is Rwanda, which did not kick out all NGOs but instead developed a process that moved NGOs from post disaster relief responders to partners in the country’s development strategy.  

In the post-genocide context, the first order of business was to save as many lives as possible.  Similar to Haiti, that period was also rife with confusion and resulted in the waste of a lot of resources.  However, Rwanda has since established its own development strategy, strengthen its governance structures and engage NGOs as partners in its development efforts with a focus on capacity building.  Today, Rwanda is not only stable, its economy is growing and it is considered a model for other developing countries.

Closer to home the commune of Delmas, whose mayor is Mr. Wilson Jeudy, is illustrative of a leader who has been able to engage the IC, NGOs and NGOs in projects that benefit his community. His approach, similar to Rwanda, is not one of antagonism. Whether it is the PRODEPUR project financed by the world bank to rebuild homes and provide access to basic services in Delmas 32, or the British Red Cross building of Canals, marketplaces, paving, drainage, community clinics and installing solar panels street lighting in the areas of Delmas 19 or USAID Lokal + projects.  The municipality works alongside organizations like PADF, JP/HRO, and Build Change while at the same growing its tax base.  Today, the commune of Delmas is used as a model of how a municipality can work with external partners to build trust with its citizens and grow its local revenue base.

As a country, Haiti uses international aid as the primary source for capital investments.  In the current budget for fiscal year 2017-18, 94% of the domestic resources (i.e., tax revenues) are allocated to operating expenses and 6% for capital expenditures.  Most of the budget is spent on operating expenses like salaries.  Conversely, this means that most of the capital investments we see happening are done by or with the support of international donors or with limited loans like the Petro Caribe program funded by the Venezuelan government.  Most donor countries, including Venezuela, that give grants will use their own consultants and require the purchase of goods from their manufacturers.  Objectively, this is logical and a strategy that is to be expected.  For example, it would be, at best, naive to expect that the US government would allow its money to be used for the purchase of a French-made Renault vehicle, or for the French to allow their taxpayer money to purchase a flight on American airlines.

Irrespective of one’s position, we can all agree that Haiti needs to strengthen its governance structures to respond to the people’s aspirations. To change the dynamics and increase our government’s ability to make demands on external actors will require that we clean our own house and apply rules and processes that are legitimate.  This starts, first and foremost, by respecting our own constitution, which calls for the inclusion of our citizens in the governance process. 

It would mean that by respecting our own laws there would be a local representative from the departmental assemblies coming from the indirect elections also called elections in the second degree.  This local representative has the constitutional right to sit in the ministerial council to ensure that local issues are represented in the debates, especially around budget time.  As the saying goes: you are either at the table or on the menu. Finally, it would mean respecting the budget process as outlined in the constitution to ensure that citizens are able to participate in setting priorities for their communities.

How Haiti Can Better Use Aid Dollars

One of the major complications in development is how International Aid is disbursed.  A 2012 study by the Center for Global Development found that “the Government of Haiti received just 1 percent of humanitarian aid and somewhere between15 and 21 percent of longer-term relief aid.” It found that “donors continue to be reluctant to fund the government. Valid concerns arise about the lack of capacity within the Haitian Government, as well as entrenched systems of patronage, corruption, and inefficiency. Yet government capacity will never be built or improved if donors continue to bypass local institutions in favor of NGOs.” This has been the most common reason put forward by the donor community to bypass Haitian organizations and institutions. 

To change the dynamics and our government’s ability to make demands on external actors will require that we clean our own house and apply rules and processes that are legitimate.  This starts, first and foremost, by respecting our own constitution, which calls for the inclusion of our citizens in the governance process.  This would ensure three things:


  1. That there is compliance with our laws and regulations
  1. That the public sector is efficient, and problems are identified, and dealt with timely and appropriately
  1. That the state’s resources are used judiciously, and the work is an alignment with the role of the state and the expectations of the citizenry

Indeed, respecting the process and our own laws would arm our elected representatives with the legitimacy when engaged in negotiations with international partners.  It would allow them to make demands, push back and even say no when it is not in the national interest.  If the administration had listened to the voices of the marginalized urban and rural poor, they would have known that the fuel increase was unacceptable.  They also would have had the cover to say “no” to the IMF’s request during the negotiations.

In my current role leading a leadership development organization, we teach people about community development.  This process starts by recognizing the existing assets within a community and more specifically within the people.  It is important to find the culprits of wrongdoing, past and present, but by nature as well as an occupational hazard, I am allergic with the idea of pointing fingers at how other people manage their resources when we are unwilling to responsibly manage our own.   Yes, France.  Yes, slavery. Yes, Duvalier. Yes, US occupations. Yes, yes, yes and yes BUT it is time that we claim ourselves and define our future. 

Conclusion

To summarize my view of the IC/NGO debate, we have to acknowledge the asymmetry that exists between Haiti and the donor community as well as NGO.  However, this state of affairs does not have to be permanent nor can it define who we are.  We have seen examples of Rwanda and Delmas that have been able to harness their own resources (people and money) and that of the international community and NGOs to achieve their own strategic goals.  Given our governance issues, it is also inevitable that partners will distrust our systems and processes (Haitians do as well) but despite any self-serving conclusion they may reach about Haiti, there is a necessity to put our house in order.   We must not allow this narrative to define our agency as free people who make good and bad choices but also assume its share of responsibilities.

While eliminating all aids is not the solution, ensuring its effective use can contribute to Haiti’s development but it [aid] will never be the long-term solution.  We need to understand that aid is a foreign policy tool that serves the commercial and/or political interests of the donor country. We need to use it for our own interests.  In the best circumstances, aid could help advance our development agenda but it can never and should never replace the rational utilization of our own resources. 

We Haitians must take the destiny of our country into our own hands.  It starts with recognizing the humanity in each other.  It includes good governance, transparency and requires a better allocation and rational utilization of the resources we do have: human capital and natural. It involves having a strategic plan but also the ability to coordinate its execution with rigor. More importantly, it requires sacrifices but also a shared accountability, which means the inclusion of the population at various levels as outlined in our constitution.  Given the level of mistrust within the nation, what is most vital to us as a nation is to respect the rule of law.

We have been and will always be a proud people and despite our history we can never allow any narrative that questions our agency to take hold.  We have agency, decency and dignity.  We are Haitians and we do have agency.

[1] Author Gerard Barthelmy judiciously sketched this point in his book “Haiti en Dehors”