Source: Ruth Fremson, New York Times

In many developing countries, lack of documentation can be a major obstacle for people who want to claim their rights to citizenship. India, in particular, has as many as 400 million people unaccounted for.

In the book Paper Citizens, Kamal Sadiq explores India’s over-dependence on documentary citizenship and the difficulties created for the government to distinguish between who is a legal citizen and who is not. The current national identification card (NID) leads to problems such as “blurred citizenship” where many natural-born citizens (unable to receive government benefits without NIDs) resort to fake documentation in order to receive benefits such as access to government welfare programs, the ability to open a bank account or enroll in school, and protection from wrongful deportation from their homes.

This problem is most common in poor, isolated areas that the government cannot reach. In such areas, it is difficult to acquire something as simple as a birth certificate because the nearest hospital may be miles away. As a result, this makes it increasingly difficult for the child to obtain legal documentation as s/he grows older. An added dilemma is that paper documentation is easily lost. For those have legal documentation, one unforeseen natural disaster could easily wipe out everything, leaving many unaccounted for.

In an attempt to rectify these problems, a recent private-public partnership in India has developed the unique identity (UID) scheme. This project electronically stores biometric data, such as thumbprint and iris scans, in order to establish national identity. After registering with UID, each person receives a 12-digit AADHAAR number that serves as their ID. Since its inception in 2009, UID has recorded 200 million out of India’s 1.2 billion people. The program plans to scan 600 million people into its database by 2014.

UID could have major benefits for India. For one, if UID reaches its goal of scanning the entire Indian population, it would make it difficult for illegal citizens to falsely acquire government benefits. The poorest would benefit greatly from the system as they would be allowed those rights from which they were previously barred and be safe from the threat of deportation. Another major benefit of the program is that it allows the government to electronically send money to banks and village shops, allowing for easier distribution of government welfare benefits. It must be asked, however, how this program determines who is a rightful citizen and who is not. Many illegal citizens have been successful in acquiring real documentation through fake means and could easily be put into the system. This could seriously undermine the validity of UID and level it to that of the current NID program.

However, if a country does choose to implement biometric identification schemes, Alan Gelb of the Center for Global Development (CGD) explains that, “enabling citizens to establish an official identity is a crucial part of the development process.” It allows for everyone to be accounted for, especially in instances of natural disasters or conflict. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, two countries with documentation problems similar to those of India, biometric scanning ensured that over 200,000 returning refugees received only one repatriation payment. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, biometric scanning has been useful in demobilization grants. According to CGD, there are already eleven African countries taking part in some type of biometric identification (a complete list can be found here).

Tom Cruise in Minority Report getting an iris scan.

This may be a bit reminiscent of Steven Spielberg’s Minority Report, a film based in a 2054 Washington D.C. that is dependent on retinal scanning to track its citizens. Similarly, the UID scheme has met resistance as many feel that the program may lead to misuse of private information for government benefit. Opponents frequently cite countries such as the United Kingdom, the United States and France, which did away with their own biometric identification programs because they impeded on the rights of their citizens.  In addition, a major concern is that the UID is linked with the National Population Register rather than the national census, allowing information gathered for the UID program to be widely shared (information sent to the national census is confidential). Many fear that because there are a number of U.S. corporations involved in the project, Washington will also have access to this information.

While such concerns may be warranted, this is not reason enough to do away with biometric scanning just yet.  Perhaps in order to ease such doubts, India could invest in stronger data-protection laws in order to better protect its citizens and dismiss any fears of breaches in confidentiality.

Education is a serious endeavor in these countries. Confucian values and the meritocratic structure of society collectively emphasize the role of education in one’s future success. China, South Korea and Singapore have made primary education compulsory. All three countries hold national college examinations, a yearly high-stakes examination that college-aspiring students sit for. In the event that these students obtain unsatisfactory results, they will be denied admission to prestigious universities and will have to wait an entire year before they can retake the exams. Repeaters are not looked upon favorably.

So the struggle begins.

Student Under Pressure | Source: theonlinepost.com

Nine hour school days, extra remedial classes, praying parents, superstitious practices, and even the grounding of aircraft; anything to give these students a leg up in life. South Korean government employees stake out hagwons (for profit cram schools) to ensure that they are not operating after 10 at night, an initiative instated by President Lee Myung Bak to relieve stress on Korean students and ensure they get sufficient rest. Immensely profitable private tutoring centers have sprung up all over Asia, and the competitive nature of education in these countries compels students to attend additional classes after school has ended. The average amount of time spent in school and extra classes by these students often exceed the hours their parents spend at work.

It seems these education policies have worked. The economic growth for South Korea, Singapore and China has been nothing short of impressive. The Profile for International Student Assessment (PISA) conducted by the OECD consistently ranks South Korea, China (represented by Shanghai) and Singapore within the top 5 countries – meaning that students from both countries outperform other countries when it comes to reading, math and science scores.

China graduates at a job fair in Guangxi | Source: www.xinhua.com

However, the education initiatives of these countries have recently come under fire for various reasons. Apple’s co-founder, Steve Wozniak, recently claimed that a company like Apple would not be able to develop in Singapore, where people are not encouraged to be creative and think out of the box. China’s graduates have found it immensely difficult to find a job that justifies the investment on higher education. South Korea faces the challenge of curbing the high suicide rates that plague its teenage students, who are unable to cope with the stress of getting into university. All three countries also face a declining birth-rate, because more women are entering the workforce and having children later on in life.

This begs the question – where should governments draw the line when it comes to education? There is little doubt that a highly educated populace is an important factor in spurring economic growth, with economic journals publishing articles on preventing brain drain and the need for labor-intensive industries to shift to capital-intensive industries. Research has also shown for developing countries, it is necessary to invest in both primary and secondary education to achieve economic growth. However, in the case of China, where a university graduate’s salary is two-thirds that of a 20 year old courier boy in Beijing, when is one’s level of education considered too high?

It also raises the question of what a quality education constitutes. Should the demands of a country’s economy dictate what a quality education is? For all three Asian countries, rote memorization is the name of the game. Many educators have criticized this approach, saying self-expression, critical thinking and creativity is lost. Yet, rote learning is credited with learning self-discipline and skills of concentration. What is, then, the ‘right’ combination and which method should governments of developing countries pick?

Perhaps, as with development, there is no sole way to go about education. When it comes to education policies, what is one country’s cup of tea might not be another’s.

Source: wisdomblow.com

Now fast forward to the present. A few days ago, India happily announced that it has had no new cases of polio for the 2011 year, an incredible improvement from the high levels that existed just two years before. These results were almost entirely due to a vast and ambitious effort that sent 2.3 million vaccinators around the country to give 900 million doses of the polio vaccine that prevents the disease. An obvious question comes to mind: how was such a large and complex mission possible, and ultimately successful?

The Global Alliance for Vaccinations and Immunizations (or GAVI) is largely responsible. GAVI is a public-private partnership that has brought together a vast assortment of world leaders, experts, philanthropists, and pharmaceutical companies to eradicate polio once and for all. In the case of India, companies and organizations such as UNICEF, the United Nations, the World Bank, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and JP Morgan teamed up with the Indian government to fight the disease head on.

Largely the brainchild of technology mogul and noted philanthropist Bill Gates, GAVI implements innovative practices that channel its partners’ specific skill sets, while also setting up infrastructure to maintain success in the future. As GAVI partner David Cameron, prime minister of the United Kingdom, states:

It was set up by people who wanted to do aid in a different way. It doesn’t just save lives for the here and now but gives those countries and economies the ability to grow and succeed…

GAVI has two main features that have been crucial in the partnership’s success. First, GAVI requires some kind of financial buy-in from the recipient country, even if it is only a small amount. This practice keeps the recipient nation invested in the project and creates a healthy peer-to-peer relationship between the country and the partnership. Secondly, GAVI stresses accountability; it requires extensive record-keeping to make sure that vaccines get to where they need to be and are generally used in the correct way.

Source: measlesintitiative.org

GAVI is far from perfect. For example, Publish What You Fund, a global campaign to improve aid transparency, rated the alliance as having “poor” transparency, and criticisms have arisen about Gate’s tendency to allow personal connections to influence grant-making decisions. Their overall strategy, however, has been undeniably successful, even in areas other than India. GAVI’s Hib Initiative paved the way for the spread of the Hib vaccine (which prevents meningitis, pneumonia, epiglottis, and other serious infections) in sub-Saharan Africa; instances of illnesses caused by Hib have declined by 85% in the area. The partnership’s rotavirus vaccine project in Kenya has also been highly effective, as the rate of rotavirus, which is a major cause of child mortality, has fallen sharply.

Though India is rightfully celebrating the success of conquering its polio problem, many challenges in other health areas still exist. For example, India still has high rates of malaria, tuberculosis, and various NTDs. Luckily, almost all of these can be prevented with the use of vaccines, and GAVI has put forward a successful, public-private blueprint for combating these sicknesses. If India and GAVI keep up the good work, then who knows: India could be announcing a year free from another disease sooner than we might think.

But what if there was a simple solution for all of this? What if there was a way to ensure that the government was not corrupt, and would facilitate growth and foreign investments?

Lee Hsien Loong, Prime Minister of Singapore | Source: Jakarta Globe

A recent article in The Economist describes Singapore’s government salaries—higher than most—as attempts to ward off potential corruption. However, these salaries have received backlash, mostly from Singaporeans unable to handle rising prices and who do not believe such high salaries are necessary to prevent corruption. As a result, the salaries of government officials are being cut by up to 51 percent.

In Singapore, the reasoning for higher salaries goes slightly beyond an anti-corruption measure: it is meant to serve as a draw for individuals in the private sector, and as a competitive salary as well. However, the new reform ties government officials’ salaries to the well-being of Singaporeans themselves and is based on meeting specific socioeconomic targets. Using a new mathematical formula that draws from 1,000 people’s salaries instead of 48 to get a more accurate median, government officials have even more of an incentive to stay clean and promote Singaporean growth.

Furthermore, the problem with Singapore’s model is that while successful, it is not scalable in developing countries just yet. Singapore’s efficient government aims to maximize the country’s output and growth, while attempting to stem the flow of brain drain abroad and to the private sector. Unfortunately, some developing countries suffer from significant brain drain and are unable to lure those people back. Intended to attract private sector workers to work for the government, Singapore’s system is efficient partly because even using an adjusted salary calculation leaves their government officials far wealthier than most. While using the same formula may still provide leaders in developing countries with salaries higher than the average citizen, it may not be enough to deter the potential profits from corruption.

Ratio of Political Leaders' Pay to GDP per person | Source: The Economist

This predicament poses two interesting questions for developing countries: (1) would raising government salaries deter corruption? or, (2) would it encourage corruption because higher salaries could be more easily directed for personal gain? In addition, developing countries would then need the ability to fund higher government salaries and create a functioning judicial/legislative system that could uphold the anti-corruption practices intended as a result.

The dilemma remains that there is no sure-fire way to get rid of corruption. Rather, there are various alternatives that can deter corruption from dominating politics and impede the welfare of people in developing countries. Until they have the resources to raise government salaries or take a hard(er) crack at corruption, developing countries will just have to wait and see if the reverse occurs in Singapore and corruption rises as salaries decrease.

The outlook on Haiti appears frustrating. With the fate of the Interim Haiti Recovery Commission (IHRC) still up in the air, there is no governmental apparatus in place to determine which reconstruction projects will be awarded funds from international aid.

Source: http://www.npr.org

President Michel Martelly, better known as Sweet Micky to the locals, has done little to inspire confidence in the Haitian government. During his short term, his choices for Prime Minister were dismissed twice and he was unable to persuade his Parliament to extend IHRC’s mandate. The unemployment rate remains high at 40.6%, and tent cities remain the only housing option for 500,000 Haitians. Local Haitians complain that international aid is funneled directly to foreign nongovernmental organizations or contractors, bypassing local labor. When government projects are overlooked in favor of foreign firms, Haitians end up losing out as fewer jobs are created locally.

However, one needs to take a closer look to see the buds of progress. Half of the rubble as a result of the earthquake has been cleared. President Martelly has devoted government funds to provide free education to about 1 million children, highlighting his dedication to Haiti’s future generations. The United States government has supported several initiatives, among them, the construction of the Caracol Industrial Park in the north. One of the largest South Korean garment producers, Sae-A Trading Company, has agreed to set up shop in Haiti, providing an estimated 20,000 jobs for the currently unemployed population. Even more revealing, are the statistics for the country’s growth – an impressive 8.6% in GDP growth in 2010.

Source: www.npr.org

More importantly is the country’s move towards investments in long-term initiatives. International aid is decidedly focused on programs that promote education and the construction of infrastructure such as waterwaste treatment plants and roads. There is also a shift towards agricultural programs, with the World Bank providing Haiti an agricultural grant of $50 million. The initiative would increase Haiti’s food security in the long run, which is highly important. (Haiti was a food exporter before natural disasters and political initiatives turned it into a food importer.) The recent implementation of the 16-6 program targeted at moving squatters out of the tent cities provides homeless Haitians with a year of rent. The program has seen the numbers of people at these camps decrease from a peak of 1.5 million to the current 500,000. While the conditions at these camps remain squalid, President Martelly and his government are working to return the country to some semblance of normalcy.

The progress has been admittedly slow. Yet, should there be any surprise? As one of the poorest countries in the Western hemisphere, Haiti has been plagued by disaster after disaster, both political and natural. While the reconstruction work is slow and at times frustrating, the IHRC’s slogan, Build Back Better, has taken form. Ken Marten, U.S. ambassador to Haiti at the time of the earthquake says it best,

“We need to be careful not to hold Haiti to different standards, or higher standards, than we hold other countries to. If you look at European cities after World War II – places like Cologne and Rotterdam – they took 10 years-plus to rebuild. I don’t see why we’d expect it to happen a whole lot faster here.”

Haiti is a work in progress. In a world where immediate gratification is the name of the game, it is much easier to focus on the negative aspects of Haiti today – the squalor of the tent cities, the slow progress of reconstruction work and its political troubles. Yet, the trajectory that development in Haiti has taken is nothing short of encouraging.

When one thinks of vacation spots, sandy beaches and warm sunshine probably come to mind— not the dry, wildly varying climate of Libya. A full-fledged promotion of tourism, however, is exactly what the country plans to put into motion. Officials hope that an influx of tourists can help the country take a big step towards economic recovery.

Libya recently established the Libyan Society for Tourism Activation, an organization that plans to attract visitors by highlighting the country’s unique culture and advertising Libya’s historic Greek and Roman ruins. The society has recently staged a parade and flame lighting ceremony to emphasize Libya’s intriguing culture and heritage. Extensive efforts to preserve the famous ruins have also helped maintain a potentially strong tourist attraction.

Source: forum.worldwindcentral.com

This is not the first time that the country has made an effort to promote tourism. In the early 2000s, the Gaddafi regime introduced legislation that called for increased focus on the tourism sector of the Libyan economy. Their initiatives morphed into a nationally funded, erratic approach that had little to no foreign investment and led to limited growth.

This time around, Libya plans to place a greater stress on the foreign investment, which was lacking under the previous government. With a more open, transparent system, investors should theoretically be less uneasy about engaging with the Libyan economy. The Libyan Society for Tourism Activation is “open to all that would develop and promote the tourism industry,” and so far seems to be wooing the private sector to help facilitate this promotion. Indeed, both the Intercontinental Hotel Group and the Rotana Hotel Management Corporation have expressed interest in building units in Libya, and numerous foreign airlines have committed to helping restore and diversify the Libyan airline industry.

Libya can also take note of Costa Rica, a country known for its tourism that has deftly handled foreign investment. Costa Rica has established the Costa Rica Investment Promotion Agency (CINDE), an organization that, among other duties, matches potential investors with attractive opportunities in the tourism industry. There are also numerous examples of investment success stories in Costa Rica even in times of economic uncertainty, a situation that Libya obviously faces now. Perhaps Libya could establish a similar agency that can aid in both finding appealing investment opportunities and matching them with potential suitors. By modeling some aspects of its tourism industry after Costa Rica’s, Libya could potentially have a little bit of its own success.

Although Libya seems to be on the right track with regards to economic growth through tourism, it does still face some hurdles. The number of flights coming into the country is low because of runways damaged from the conflict, and general uncertainty about safety remains high. However, if Libya continues to

Source: guardian.co.uk

encourage investments and takes a lesson or two from Costa Rica, the tourism industry holds the potential for serious growth. With its rich history, unique climate, and wealth of archeological sites, Libya could serve as an attractive alternative to the typical beach vacation.

Source: The Economist

As illustrated in previous blog posts, women could play a major role in development if societal barriers to education and employment were eliminated. However, these barriers are especially difficult to overcome, as they are molded by centuries of discrimination and unequal treatment.  The act of ‘gendercide’ has been particularly difficult to overlook.

As the name implies, gendercide is “gender-selective mass killing.” The act can refer to the targeting of both males and females; however, the targeting of female infants, or female infanticide, has become deeply embedded in numerous cultures throughout the world. In East Asia specifically, this custom has come as a result of a cultural favoritism for boys over girls. Reasoning varies by region; however, does tend to be primarily economic. Girls are regarded as “liabilities” to the family and the prospects of having a male child are welcomed as a result.

For example, girls typically require dowries paid to the husband’s family (which though now illegal in India, is still common practice). After which, girls are then considered a part of their husband’s family. The male child is then more likely to stay and care for his family when older and, unlike a female, will earn an income.  Female infanticide has thus become a measure families take in order to ensure future stability for the family, and one that creates an overwhelming preference for boys.

Source: The Economist

This has resulted in highly skewed sex-ratios. The natural ratio at birth is 950 girls per 1,000 boys. In India, the 2001 national census found only 927 girls aged 0-6 for every 1,000 boys. In the past decade, this number has dropped significantly to 914 girls per 1,000 boys. The most skewed regions happen to also be among the wealthiest of India. The wealthy tend to prefer smaller family sizes. When only having one or two children, the desire for a male child then becomes a higher priority. For this reason, until recently, many attributes an increase in wealth to an increase in female infanticide.

While studies in India have shown a correlation between skewed sex-ratios and rising incomes, trends in South Korea have been somewhat different, presenting a glimmer of hope for India. In the 1990s, South Korea’s sex-ratios were close to that of India’s. However, since reaching a GDP per person of $12,000, the country has been able to dramatically improve its sex-ratio.This has also been attributed to “non-deliberate” cultural changes in South Korea which are more open to female education and government initiatives that fight discrimination.

This similar trend has been recently observed in India. An article in The Economist, “The daughter’s return”, presented an Indian sample survey study by Surjit Bhalia and Ravinder Kaur. It demonstrated a new sex-ratio for India which challenged those gathered by the previous national census. From 2004-05, the sex-ratio at birth was 924 girls per 1,000 boys. This however rose to 977 girls per 1,000 boys in 2011. In contradiction to previous assumptions, Bhalia and Kaur determined that this rise was largely the result of increased income per person. What they termed the “mature middle class” (annual income of $3,200) no longer preferred sons because access to education and changing perceptions through the media emphasized the value of having girls. Similar to the South Korean case, “the forces of modernity first exacerbated prejudice—then overwhelmed it.”

The lingering problem may be that India cannot be expected to reach the same income level per person as South Korea for quite some time. As such, waiting for cultural changes to gradually take place may not be the best course for India. There is no doubt that the value of girls needs to be better realized. While national governments have made attempts to stop female infanticide practices, their impact thus far has been weak.

Source: Hudson CGP/People, for more on Ryan Gosling in Development go here: http://developmentryangosling.tumblr.com/

What’s hotter than Durban, South Africa (besides Ryan Gosling in Development)? That would be the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which recently concluded its annual meeting there (referred to as the COP17). The main topic of discussion was the Kyoto Protocol and how the UNFCCC can extend its regulations on carbon emissions. Currently, the Kyoto Protocol only binds industrialized countries to specific emissions levels, which are due to expire next year. Developing countries, in contrast, can voluntarily decide to reduce their own emissions. However, three main barriers continue to exist, despite the successful attempt to push through an agreement by the end of the two-week summit that will result in meetings in 2015 and 2020.

The first is that the biggest polluters (U.S., China, and India) have failed to ratify the treaty (the U.S.), or view it as a significant obstacle to poverty alleviation (China and India). The second is that the rich countries, most significantly affected by the Kyoto agreement, are calling for a more even distribution of limitations (instead of targeting rich countries for the majority of emissions cuts and allowing developing countries to continue to pollute). The final obstacle to seeing results is that the Kyoto Protocol does not dictate a legal framework that enforces the emissions limitations. As a result, the meeting in Durban sought to create a new agreement that would allow for continued funding of green initiatives, encourage countries to renew their emissions commitments, and decide upon an international governing body to mandate climate objectives.

Ever since An Inconvenient Truth came out, the debate on how to address climate change has been, well, much more heated. But it’s no longer just governments that are trying to stop the temperature fluctuations and amount of carbon emissions. Recently, other groups/companies have expressed interest in joining the fight against climate change because it would damage their outputs. Starbucks is one such entity, pointing out the potential loss of their coffee beans.

Let Them Eat Carbon | Source: Economist/AFP

A recent proposal from Bertelsmann Foundation, chaired by former president of Chile, Ricardo Lagos, suggests that the UNFCCC expand its role in the global climate debate and push for greater cooperation and governance between developed and developing countries. Their ideal model? Matchmaking developed and developing countries in order to create partnerships based on the exchange of technology and policy. This will allow developing countries to benefit from the technology already being produced in developed countries and can serve as a model for structural changes necessary to facilitate these new initiatives. For developed countries, this provides them with the opportunity to help developing countries increase their production and economic growth without going through a similar coal-based industrialization process. As a result, countries should be able to leapfrog over the outdated industrial process and opt for a more climate-friendly one.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions | Source: The Economist

As one of the major issues with the climate initiatives is funding, it is beneficial to get as many people/groups on board. In a recent paper on funding climate initiatives, Michele de Nevers writes, “it will be important to ensure that climate finance does not compete with or draw resources away from other development priorities.” This brings into question exactly how countries are supposed to fund initiatives to combat climate change and encourage development, without detracting from other sectors such as health and education. While the Clean Technology Fund and Green Climate Fund were intended to assist with developing countries’ needs, developed countries also need to make the transition from coal-based energy to green alternatives. However, the option to separate climate funding from other development funds places it as a priority and indicates the ongoing need for climate initiatives.

The fact that climate change so deeply affects a wide range of actors, from individuals to entire governments, signifies the potential for joint ventures. Furthermore, it allows collaboration on green technology that prioritizes the minimization of environmental impacts. Perhaps the biggest failure of the COP17 is that it allows policy makers to maintain the illusion that climate change is not an immediate problem. While their initiatives will surely take time to fund and implement, the focus on climate awareness should begin now and not when they reconvene in 2015 and 2020.

Sweet Beginnings team

It seems that insects can be quite handy at times. In addition to malaria-fighting spiders, bees have also been doing their part in development abroad and here in the U.S. At the recent Inaugural Bipartisan Congressional Conference on Innovation in Giving and Philanthropy, Brenda Palms Barber discussed a business called Sweet Beginnings, developed through the North Lawndale Employment Network, which exclusively employs formerly incarcerated individuals. Originally, Lawndale provided job training to released offenders, however, Barber explains, “When people were ready for placement, we couldn’t find them jobs.” And that’s where the bees come in.

Based in Chicago, Sweet Beginnings produces its own honey, which is then used to create its line of all-natural beeline® products. It employs recently released felons in order to help them “establish work history, learn productive work habits, and gain marketable skills.” Employees assist in all forms of the business, from harvesting honey, creating the beeline® products, and selling the product at retail stores and events. This opens new and more lucrative employment opportunities, rather than falling back into a cycle of crime. Compared to the national average of 65 percent, the rate of former Sweet Beginnings employees returning to jail is below 4 percent. Along with this, the business, much to the surprise most, has been doing remarkably well. Annually, the company brings in $100,000 in sales and has made $2 million in project sales from the last five years.

While this case is a domestic example, its benefits can be implemented in developing countries as well. Bees are a natural resource which could create jobs and spur economic growth. Beekeeping takes relatively little training and is not as rigorous as other agricultural work. In addition, honey can be developed into a variety of different products, providing several potential streams of income.

Abroad, bees are pretty important also. The organization Bees for Development aids beekeepers in developing countries to realize the full potential of their work. This is done by providing locals with free training sessions on the ‘how to’ for beekeeping, and information on how to market and make a better profit on the product. In addition, the organization advocates for policy changes so beekeepers can gain access to the new markets.

Young man working at beekeeping cooperative. Source: Peace Corps

Through the Peace Corps’ Partnership Program, a volunteer in Ecuador, Elizabeth Clark, created a beekeeping cooperative with 18 different families in her community. The Partnership Program helps Peace Corps volunteers develop and fund projects in the countries they are serving. The community contributes 25 percent of the operating costs while the Partnership Program helps link organizations and individuals who may be interested in donating to the program. The beekeeping cooperative has helped provide a stable income for the families involved. In addition, the honey produced provides a healthier alternative to the cane sugar typically used by the community. Clark explains that “Working in a group will allow cooperative members to collaborate and exchange advice, as well as sell honey in bulk to larger organizations.”

In Uganda, the Bwindi Youth organization near Bwindi Impenetrable National Park uses beekeeping as a means to teach the youth and Batwa Pygmies about agriculture methods, conservation, and nutrition, as well as providing a means of living. The group has since created a “detailed constitution, budget, long-term work plan, and promotional brochures.”

The reason these initiatives are all buzzworthy, so to speak, is because they are scalable in a variety of environments and provide income for a variety of people. The skills involved in beekeeping, producing honey-based products, and managing the business aspects allow people to benefit from an initially low-cost initiative. As shown, the honey is a lot sweeter than the sting.

In the philanthropy world, there are usually two decisions to make: which organizations (of thousands) should I donate to, and how much should I give? Well, a third question has been added to that decision-making process, one that might not be easy to ignore. The new, big question: do I invest in an organization that runs its operations like a business and expects returns on investments, or do I invest in one that is addressing a cause I find important and worthwhile? If you’re lucky, the organization fits both criteria. However, the recent financial crises have put a kink in that idea, promoting the need for safer investment and more calculated giving strategies.

Charles Bronfman and Jeffrey Solomon agree that philanthropies should operate like businesses—why should their business structure be any different if the same goal is to efficiently and effectively achieve a specific objective? On the other side of the argument, Michael Edwards argues that focusing solely on business strategies and using business-oriented metrics will exclude a lot of people from receiving the help they need.

Traditionally, business-oriented approaches constitute a return on investment, such as the ability to repay a microfinance loan (whether the loan does or does not have interest). However, there is an issue in the fact that big businesses that have gone bankrupt during the financial crisis are not so different from microcredit institutions like Grameen Bank, which have not done much better. Over saturating the market and providing loans to people who are unable to pay them back is a problem both in the developed and developing world. While this could suggest that the business model previously relied upon is not a good option, it also implies that if lending rules are followed, they could produce the desired results instead of economic collapse. This issue, however, also highlights the controversial idea of for-profit organizations that charge poor people high interest rates and will do almost anything to collect on the loan payments.

Business-operated philanthropies seek to maximize results, but critics say that maximizing results will not provide the necessary opportunities for poor people to elevate themselves out of poverty. For example, some note the effectiveness of unconditional cash transfers, which provide no return on investment and do not dictate how the transfer is spent. For result-minded individuals, unconditional cash transfers complicate how one measures the effectiveness of a program. However, the ability to prioritize one’s needs and spending is valuable for people in different financial situations, and for those who rely on multiple loans/sources for income.

The problem with both philanthropic philosophies (try saying that five times fast), however, is the time commitment and personal, emotional investment involved. If one expects returns and does not receive them, does that signal the time to move on and support a new organization? Similarly, if one donates money solely because of an emotional connection to the cause, will s/he withdraw support when there’s a hot, new cause in development? The most important result of any philanthropy venture is that poor people are receiving the help they need in order to reach a long-term solution to alleviate poverty. The operating structure of a philanthropic organization should not undermine its mission, as that would prove to be a much more heated debate.