Why Government Aid Doesn't
Programs funded by governments to help those in real need somehow almost always end up not achieving stated goals, no matter how long they continue and no matter how much is spent in the attempt.
According to William Easterly, this is the result of too many worthy groups pursuing too many worthy goals in ways that leave no one in particular accountably responsible for achieving any single measureable result.
"UK Chancellor of the Exchequer Gordon Brown recently gave a compassionate speech about the tragedy of extreme poverty afflicting billions of people, with millions of children dying from easily preventable diseases. He called for a doubling of foreign aid, a Marshall Plan for the world’s poor. He offered hope by pointing out how easy it is to do good. Medicine that would prevent half of malaria deaths costs only 12 cents a dose. A bed net to prevent a child from getting malaria costs only $4. Preventing 5 million child deaths over the next 10 years would cost just $3 for each new mother. ...
However, Gordon Brown was silent about the other tragedy of the world’s poor. This is the tragedy in which the West already spent $2.3 trillion on foreign aid over the last 5 decades and still had not managed to get 12-cent medicines to children to prevent half of all malaria deaths. The West spent $2.3 trillion and still had not managed to get $4 bed nets to poor families. The West spent $2.3 trillion and still had not managed to get $3 to each new mother to prevent 5 million child deaths."
As for a solution, Easterly suggests feedback and accountability:
"The two key elements necessary to make aid work, and the absence of which has been fatal to aid’s effectiveness in the past, are FEEDBACK and ACCOUNTABILITY. The needs of the rich get met through feedback and accountability. Consumers tell the firm “this product is worth the price” by buying the product, or decide the product is worthless and return it to the store. Voters tell their elected representatives that “these public services are bad” and the politician tries to fix the problem."
This makes sense. At the office we are currently having problems with our primary vendor being unable to do two simple yet important tasks well. The problem isn't that they don't mean well and try hard. Rather, it seems to be that they attempt too much, attempting to implement so many cool new ideas that none of them end up quite working the first time out, let alone arriving with proper documentation.
What's the cure? In my opinion, each of those two tasks needs to become the primary responsibility of a particular person, who knows they will be held personally accountable for the success or failure of that task. Nothing concentrates the mind on a task like knowing its failure or success will result in significant personal consequences.
I experienced that personally about 15 years ago. I'd just been hired to manage a new computer lab. Just one problem -- two weeks before its scheduled opening, the lab didn't exist. Seeing our cool new jobs just about to evaporate, my new assistant and I personally found and positioned all the furniture for the new lab that very day. The rest, as they say, was just paperwork.
