On January 12th, 2010 a devastating earthquake struck Haiti,
killing 250,000, and displacing close to 1.5 million people.
There was an immediate state lead humanitarian effort in responsive
disaster, but much of it failed to accomplish, even the most basic tasks.
Like rebuilding houses and delivering basic goods and services.
Six years later, despite billions of dollars in foreign aid and
the efforts of tens of thousands of aid workers, the situation still remains dire.
Approximately 80,000 displaced Haitians continue to live in tent camps
across the country.
And many of the camps lack on site access to water and
toilets raising serious health and sanitary concerns.
How can well staffed and well funded state led disaster relief efforts
intended to help alleviate suffering fail so miserably?
Haiti is not the only example of state led disaster relief gone awry.
In 2005, the US government failed to respond effectively to Hurricane Katrina,
and that occurred within its own borders.
The truth is, humanitarian aid intended to alleviate suffering often fails,
and in many cases causes additional harms to those who are already suffering.
There are a few major reasons why humanitarian aid efforts often fail, and
they're all tied to the realities of politics.
For one, state-led humanitarian action
frequently involves intense rivalry between government agencies.
Agencies and both in recipient countries
may spend a large amount of time competing for control over the monetary resources,
rather than focusing on how that aid could be allocated most effectively.
For example, former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates
has emphasised how in fighting over policies in the halls of Washington DC
contributed to the failures in Afghanistan and Iraq.
State provided funding also leads to competition between NGOs,
which scramble to secure as much of the government provided money as possible.
This shifts focus from helping those in need to lobbying government for
additional resources.
After the international community pledged $10 billion in aid to Haiti the number
of NGOs joining the effort skyrocketed from 10,000 to 15,000.
These 15,000 NGOs spent exorbitant sums of money
lobbying governments for a share of the $10 billion.
Sums of money that could have been spent making the lives of desperate
Haitians better.
The competition between NGOs also creates a situation, where those who are suffering
have little say in how resources are ultimately used on the ground.
In Haiti, of the 9 billion dollars spent by January 2013,
94% was funneled through international NGOs and private contractors.
It is estimated that only 5% of the money pledged for relief for
recovery efforts went directly to Haitian people and organizations.
Yet another reason that state-led humanitarian efforts also fails
is because they are stifled by inefficient bureaucracies..
In Haiti, trucks carrying supplies for the world food program were refused entry,
and delayed for several days as Haitian bureaucrat filed customs paperwork.
And shipping containers filled with basic relief goods were delayed entry for
months due to bureaucratic hand wringing, but this isn't unique to Haiti.
In the first eight months after Hurricane Katrina,
billions of dollars were wasted and mis spent.
Including a housing program that built empty and unused trailers.
What is it about government bureaucracies that so often result in waste?
Two things.
First, bureaucrats are motivated to maximize their budgets and
staff because this gives them outsized influence in policymaking.
But in order to secure more money, bureaucracies have to commit to
undertaking more activities, often beyond what they are actually capable of.
This is known as mission creep.
Second, Bureaucrats have no incentive to operate efficiently
because they are playing with someone else's money.
In fact if a bureau were to operate efficiently, and spend less than their
budget as a result they would be punished with a reduced budget next year.
The realities of politics give us good reason, to be skeptical of government's
ability, to effectively provide short term relief to struggling countries.
Whether it's the incentives of state donors and NGO's, or
the nature of beaurocracy, the state often does more harm than good,
when trying to lend a helping hand.
[MUSIC]