Michael Matheson Miller, the filmmaker of Poverty, Inc., is speaking at Notre Dame this Thursday on social entrepreneurship and foreign aid. If anyone is interested, here is the link with more information:
http://socialconcerns.nd.edu/events/film-screening-and-discussion-poverty-inc
The moral of Poverty, Inc. is both enlightening and humbling. As one speaker in the film commented: “Caring is not enough. And most times, we find it more harmful than not.” It’s humbling, and might be difficult to accept, that caring about the world’s problems, and taking genuine efforts to reach a solution, can actually perpetuate the very problems they had hoped to solve. Of course, it’s true: songs such as “Do They Know Its Christmas?” distort the reality of life in other countries, and diminish the role of those born and raised in a particular place, rather than raise educated awareness or inspire change from within. Indeed, as Magette Wade commented in the film: “What we do not need is one more pop song.”
Another example of charity causing harm can be seen from analyzing the cotton market in Kenya. In the film, Eva Muraya described how the influx of second-hand clothing in Kenya resulted in factories shutting down and cotton farms being eliminated. Arguably, the negative effects did not stop within Kenyan borders—the global market at large suffered. Indeed, with factories shutting down, Kenya no longer produced cotton unique to its country. This not only hurt the Kenyan cotton business, but also resulted in a dearth of specific, traditional Kenyan cotton in the global market.
Tom’s Shoes, as well, brought short-term “good” while also creating negative long-term effects. The Tom’s Shoe design was based off of a popular Argentine shoe. By appropriating and mass-producing the shoe, it began replacing the Argentine shoe. Although the film does not discuss the effects of Tom’s on Argentina, perhaps Argentine business suffered from the influx of Tom’s. Additionally, perhaps the global market suffered because people were not able to appreciate the Argentine shoe on which the Tom’s design was based.
Hopefully, lawyers can help to create real change. Currently, as one speaker noted in the film, “the law could be friendly to some of us, but could be the enemy for the majority [the poor].” Ideally, the law will morph into an equalizer, not a divider. Additionally, social entrepreneurs should strive to inspire change from within, and work as partners, rather than as paternalistic figures from afar.
I completely agree with this post. I think that we have to do a better job of producing change long-term. For example, the solar lights should have been purchased by the NGO from the company producing them in the region, rather than undercutting what the local producers were selling. Similar with Tom’s – one shoe purchased should also equal purchasing a shoe in the local region.