Given all of the bad news coming out of the Middle East lately, it is nice to see a flicker of light in the darkness in the form of Turkey’s desperately needed aid to the beleaguered peoples of Somalia, Yemen, and South Sudan.
“This aid will be sent to all the regions in Somalia. There is 1,000 trucks-loaded humanitarian aid in this ship,” Turkish Red Crescent President Kerem Kinik told Anadolu state news agency.
The ship carrying the cargo is due to arrive on Saturday, the first day of Ramadan when Muslims fast from sunrise to sunset.
Among the cargo is flour, sugar, medicine and baby food, which will help 3 million Somalis during the holy month.
Eleven ships have been sent from Turkey to Somalia in total, while two more are being prepared to be sent to Yemen.
“There is a cholera outbreak in Somalia, Yemen and South Sudan right now. After Yemen, we will try to reach to Cuba and northern regions in South Sudan. This is a big mobilisation,” Kinik said, adding that the aid should reach around 9 million people in total.
Turkey has also set up mobile bakeries in Somalia, including one in the capital Mogadishu which provides 4,000 loafs of bread a day, while a mobile kitchen distributes 7,000 hot meals to hospitals, orphanages and centres for the disabled.
As these nations reel from civil strife and potential famine, it is nice to see one of their neighbors step up and be a responsible member of the international community (notwithstanding some troubling political developments).
If you were a billionaire, how much of your wealth would you give away to charity? No doubt most people would donate something, albeit only a fraction of their total wealth. But what about giving nearly every penny you had — and doing so without any credit for your generosity?
It is not everyday that a nasty parasitic disease is wiped off the face of the Earth…in fact, this has yet to have ever happened — until this year, when the Carter Center seems poised to complete its decades-long work in eradicating the debilitating guinea worm infection.
Once the scourge of the developing world — affecting nearly 4 million people less than three decades ago — this painful disease has been reduced to less than two dozen cases as of 2015 (which in turn was 83 percent less than in 2014). Continue reading →
Today is World Food Day, which commemorates the founding of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. It also seeks to bring attention to global hunger and malnutrition, both of which have thankfully been markedly reduced over the years, but which remain intractable problems in a large part of the world.
The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), one of America’s most effective environmental charities, offers a helpful reminder that, even with the world’s population sent to grow by another 2 billion in the coming decades, there are viable solutions in sight — if we can muster the political and public will to take action. Continue reading →
For those of you as morally devastated by the migrant crisis as I am, The Independent has compiled a list of charities, humanitarian organizations, grassroots movements, and other ways in which you can help the thousands of refugees desperately fleeing sociopolitical disasters across Africa and the Middle East. See it here.
From donating funds to giving away well needed supplies to joining advocacy groups, there are plenty of options for those who may lack the time or resources.
Additionally, I recommend you check out U.S.-based CharityNavigator.com, which can help you choose the reliable and effective charities to support. It also has a section dedicated to the Syrian crisis here, as well as another list of charities involved in the largely overlooked but equally catastrophic Yemen crisis (click here).
Do whatever you can, and remember that no amount of assistance is too small for a tragedy this desperate.
Given the country’s small size, I believe this would instantly make it the largest per capita host of refugees, as well as immigrants in general, in the developed world. (Even the government’s initial offer of 50 is somewhat large relative to the population.) According to the Telegraph:
After the Icelandic government announced last month that it would only accept 50 humanitarian refugees from Syria, Bryndis Bjorgvinsdottir encouraged fellow citizens to speak out in favour of those in need of asylum. In the space of 24 hours, 10,000 Icelanders – the country’s population is 300,000 – took to Facebook to offer up their homes and urge their government to do more.
“I’m a single mother with a six-year-old son… We can take a child in need. I’m a teacher and would teach the child to speak, read and write Icelandic and adjust to Icelandic society. We have clothes, a bed, toys and everything a child needs. I would of course pay for the airplane ticket,” wrote Hekla Stefansdottir in a post.
Much bigger countries are wrangling over taking far fewer refugees proportionally. Although Iceland is a much smaller society, with citizens thus having a larger voice in government policy, many well-off Americans, Germans, French, and other developed-world citizens could just as well petition their officials to house the world’s most vulnerable citizens.
In any case, I expect nothing less in terms of moral leadership from the society that collectively mourned the loss of its first and only fatality from a police shooting in history — back in 2013.
…With a decaying social welfare state, more and more public amenities exist only as the result of the hyper-wealthy donating them. But when the commons are donated by the wealthy, rather than guaranteed by membership in society, the democratic component of civic society is vastly diminished and placed in the hands of the elite few who gained their wealth by using their influence to cut taxes and gut the social welfare state in the first place.
It’s much like how in my former home of Pittsburgh, the library system is named for Andrew Carnegie, who donated a portion of the initial funds. But the donated money was not earned by Carnegie; it trickled up from his workers’ backs, many of them suffering from overwork and illness caused by his steel factories’ pollution. The real social cost of charitable giving is the forgotten labor that builds it and the destructive effects that flow from it.
To be clear, the issue isn’t so much about individual elites donating their wealth to humanitarian efforts; no doubt at least some of them are benevolent and sincere, and their money often goes a long way for certain causes. But the problem lies in the aggregate, when entire societies — from their political and economic systems, to their media and public education — are at the mercy of a small class of individuals that determines what resources go where, based on what conditions. Being beholden to a handful of elites is not much better than to an overpowering state; indeed, often times it is often indistinguishable.
Spain’s economy was among the hardest hit by the global recession, and it remains in bad shape to this day, with record-high levels of unemployment and poverty.
But with a long and deeply entrenched sense of community and social cohesion, many Spanish communities have weathered these trying times through good old-fashioned collective action.
A resounding testament to these values is the aptly-named “Solidarity Fridge” located in the Basque town of Galdakao. As NPR reports, this community of 30,000 is the catalyst for this almost-unheard of idea.
The goal is to avoid wasting perfectly good food and groceries. In April, the town established Spain’s first communal refrigerator. It sits on a city sidewalk, with a tidy little fence around it, so that no one mistakes it for an abandoned appliance. Anyone can deposit food inside or help themselves.
“The idea for a Solidarity Fridge started with the economic crisis — these images of people searching dumpsters for food — the indignity of it. That’s what got me thinking about how much food we waste,” Saiz told NPR over Skype from Mongolia, where he’s moved onto his next project, living in a yurt and building a hospital for handicapped children.
Saiz says he was intrigued by reading about a scheme in Germany in which people can go online and post notices about extra food and others can claim it.
But Saiz wanted something more low-tech in his hometown of Galdakao — something accessible to his elderly neighbors who don’t use the Internet. So he went to the mayor with his idea for a Solidarity Fridge.
According to the New York Times, four sizeable charities — the Cancer Fund of America, Cancer Support Services, Children’s Cancer Fund of America and the Breast Cancer Society — have been accused by the Federal Trade Commission and all fifty U.S. states of being controlled by the same small network of individuals who were enriching themselves with millions in donations.
According to the complaint, [James] Reynolds devised the fund-raising scheme in 1987 and recruited his son, friends and members of his church congregation to participate in the years that followed. The F.T.C.’s finding of $187 million in misspent donations reflects the charities’ activity from 2008 to 2012. In that time, the charities spent less than 3 percent of donations on cancer patients.
“The defendants’ egregious scheme effectively deprived legitimate cancer charities and cancer patients of much-needed funds and support”, said Jessica Rich, director of the F.T.C.’s bureau of consumer protection.
The complaint also accuses the organizations of falsifying financial documents, reporting inflated revenues and “gifts in kind” they claimed to distribute internationally.
Aside from the sheer sordidness of this affair — enlisting loved ones and church members to embezzle funds meant to go to cancer victims — this it is vital reminder about the importance of being vigilant towards any and every charity you are interested in. No matter how admirable or convincing the cause, please do your utmost to fact-check rigorously. Plenty of good and honest organizations doing effective work lack funding.
And while it is true that these organizations have not been formally convicted, the details of the case, and some prior controversies, do not look encouraging.
In any case, checkout charity reviewers like Charity Navigator, Give Well, and Charity Watch to see if any organizations you are interested in make the cut. Feel free to share your own trustworthy watchdogs.
NPR reports on an international study with a vital, yet surprisingly novel, goal: finding out whether or not humanitarian is actually effective for lifting people out of poverty. Despite the billions of dollars going into global aid of some form or another every year, there is an unfortunate dearth of data on what is most effective and how.
In response, a Yale university professor has teamed up with several humanitarian groups around the world (including MIT’s Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab and the nonprofit Innovations for Poverty Action) to rigorously test poverty reduction programs with “the same method doctors use to test drugs (that is, randomized control trials).” Listen the result here or read the following excerpt:
An anti-poverty program in Bangladesh, called BRAC, looked like it was successful. It seemed to help nearly 400,000 families who were living off less than $1.25 each day. So Karlan and his colleagues wanted to test the program and see if it could work in other countries.
They teamed up with a network of researchers and nonprofits in six developing countries. They went to thousands of communities and found the poorest families.
Then they divided the families into two groups. They gave half the families nothing. And the other half a whole smorgasbord of aid for one to two years. They gave them:
Some livestock for making money, such as goats for milk, bees for honey, or guinea pigs for selling. “Depending on the site, there were different things specifically appropriate for that context,” Karlan says.
Training about how to raise the livestock
Food or cash so they wouldn’t eat the livestock
A savings account
Help with their health — both physical and mental
Karlan and his colleagues reported the results of the massive experiment in the journalScience this week.
So what did they find? Well, the strategy worked pretty well in five of the six countries they tried it in. Families who got the aid started making a little more money, and they had more food to eat.
“We see mental health go up. Happiness go up. We even saw things like female power increase,” Karlan says.
But here’s what sets this study apart from the rest: Families continued to make a bit more money even a year after the aid stopped.
“People were stuck. They give them this big push, and they seem to be on a sustained increased income level,” says Justin Sandefur, an economist at the Center for Global Development in Washington, who wasn’t involved in the study.
“What I found exciting and unique about this study is that the impact of the aid was durable and sustainable,” he added.
The results suggest that the right kind of aid does help people in multiple places. It lifted the families up just a little bit so they could finally start inching out of extreme poverty.
The researchers caution that while the data is positive, there is still a lot to be done. For starters, most recipients remained very poor, with incomes and food consumption together only increasing by around 5 percent on average.
Moreover, it is still unknown how sustainable even these modest bumps are, as the study only followed the results for a year after the aid stopped.
Even so, the findings are very important, as they show aid groups that fairly basic strategy can often work. Even a little bit of extra money can make a huge difference in improving families’ lives, whether it is allowing them to make gains in their nutrition or health, send their kids to school, or simple hope.