Self Help. My Catchphrase of the Day

For most of my brief time in development, I’ve worked within a certain type of philosophy: that players in market systems, with a few additional inputs such as training and support, can provide services that help people work from poverty. It’s not the same as the traditional development model that relies on externally-funded programs to deliver goods themselves. Instead, it hopes to catalyze existing or new entrepreneurs to build businesses that provide access to water, energy, agricultural inputs, and so on, and if things are done right, foster an entire industry that out-delivers and outlives our involvement.

I’ve been sitting in water access sessions where this approach is termed ‘self-help’ a nice development moniker that, I guess, attempts to legitimise this for big development players. You know, if the term ‘self-help’ makes it easier for these organizations to accept what Practica and our partners have been doing for years, then that’s fine. But let’s get a few things straight about relying on market systems to deliver on development targets.

1) Poor people are already active actors in the market. They already make purchases that improve their lives. This is not new. People already buy soap, food, clothes and beer. Not always much, but they do. And people will often find surprising sums for something they really want. We must see the poor as active players in the market, i.e. consumers or users and not ‘beneficiaries’, as they are often condescendingly called in development-speak. When I buy a pair of jeans, I’m not a ‘beneficiary’. I’m a consumer. And I am an equal participant in that transaction. I have as much power as the seller. The same applies to people buying pumps.

2) We need to trust that poor people understand very well what they want and need. Like anyone, they do a cost/benefit analysis on purchases, deciding if it’s worth it. If they don’t buy what we think is the right solution, then it’s not the right solution. Period. If our solution isn’t selling, then we haven’t developed a solution that provides benefits to people. An example: rope pumps. Why did people buy them in Senegal? Ease of use, better tasting water, pride in ownership. Why did we think they were going to sell? Reduced health costs through cleaner water. We had it wrong, and failed to understand the real (immediate) benefit that the pump provided to people. Thankfully, they still sold because there were different benefits.

3) We, as interventionist organizations, are not the drivers in this system. We can only attempt to support market actors to deliver. There is more uncertainty, both in numbers (how many wells can we promise in 2 years?) and focus (will those wells really get to the poorest, or are we fine hitting the middle class, and projecting that the market will eventually cater to the poor as well?).

While there were some interesting points made during the sessions, there was a complete lack of representation from private industry and end consumers. There was no questioning of how we catalyze the spread of what people actually want. And this is the beauty of market-driven solutions: if the solution is crap, people will not invest in it. Contrast that with traditional aid solutions, which are often given away. They can keep giving away crap, because people will always take something offered for free. But there’s less guarantee that we’re developing the right solution. When someone invests 3 months salary on a pump, we know it’s a solution that works for them.

Certainly, working through market systems to address social problems is not a complete solution – there are areas where this is just not the best way. However, a sizeable shift towards this approach is not a bad thing. My country, Canada, did not achieve relative prosperity, wealth and education through a series of disjointed 2-5 year projects, relying on the benevolence of external funders. We did by people having a vision for our country, but also acting for their own self-interest. We need to understand, engage and promote that self interest in development.

B

(photo: Hyacinthe, an EWV colleague and a farmer in Senegal, 2006)

       

Tagged as: Development, enterprise, free markets, profit, self help