New Name, Same Game: The Africa Summit and "Global Resilience"

I am not a fan of 'summits'. And this first ever African Leaders Summit is not changing my mind any. That it's the first time anyone considered Africa worthy of this kind of attention is telling but I will give someone credit for FINALLY acknowledging that Africa is a market ripe for umm.... exploitation(?). Though it isn't a far leap to think that the Chinese invasion into Africa has 'nudged' the USAID machine into action. Like Dambisa Moyo, I question if another 'aid program' is the solution but I leave those arguments for her and Bill Easterly to do it justice.

Summits get folks all fired up then they go away and come back a couple years later and have a another go at it, reporting on what happened and what didn't and what they are going to do next time (which is usually more of the same with a new name and another big splash out of media attention) and everyone travels far far away in business class and say what they could skype in and reports get written and written and written and .... yeah.... anyway....

There's a new program for Africa and the Global South called Global Resilience with #globalresilience as it's Twitter hashtag and @grp_resilience as it's Twitter handle. (The marketing of aid initiatives is a whole marketing subspecialty and the 'cuter' the names the more annoyed they make me). As usual these projects are run by the aid gods (with local partners... uh huh....) that uses development economics language that may sound cool to them but reads like a mixed pile of horse, goat, cow and pig poo in 100%humidity at 100 degrees Fahrenheit to everyone else.  Especially if you're one of the local partners. It's all newname/samegame.

Quotes below are from the USAID press release announcing the new USD$100million collaboration between USAID, the Rockefeller Foundation and 'local partners':

"the Resilience Partnership will enable communities to prepare for, withstand, and emerge stronger from shocks and stresses in a way that reduces chronic vulnerability and keeps them on the pathway to development." HUH??

"“The Global Resilience Partnership will help communities and individuals capitalize on the resilience dividend—the difference between where a region is after a shock where resilience investments have been made, compared to where the region would be if it hadn’t invested in resilience,” said Rockefeller Foundation President Dr. Judith Rodin." WHAAA??

And of course there are 'new' proposals with a new name:

"An essential feature of the Global Resilience Partnership will be a competitive Resilience Challenge—a call out to the best and brightest to present bold and innovative solutions to the toughest challenges facing the three regions. The Challenge will launch later this year and be open to non-profits, academic institutions, and the private sector, with a focus on local and regional players.".

As if that isn't what they are always saying they are doing.... Saying it again and again - competitive, innovation, local - is just [expletive] annoying. Same crap, different package. (Actually the package seems the same too: a short-term grant to do stuff that requires long-term evaluation).

I am hoping for talk of family planning because one cannot talk about desertification and other impacts of climate change without considering the numbers of people that vulnerable geographic areas must support. But I wont get my hopes up because economists don't speak much of family planning but a growing family income doesn't have much impact if the family is also growing.

My favorite line: "The need for the Resilience Partnership is clear: Over the last 30 years, total development losses as a result of recurring crises represent $3.8 trillion worldwide." Which is basically an admission that all the previous 'challenges' taken on by the 'best and brightest' to create 'bold and innovative solutions' have not worked. 

I wonder what makes them think it will work this time.