Rethinking donor-recipient relations: Is there any relationship beyond funding?

The Dutch development aid system is under pressure, both from within as well as from outside the sector, from the North and the South. Not only is the system in general being questioned, but also the role and added value of Dutch NGOs. On the 14th and 15th of April 2010, PSO organized a two-day seminar to start rethinking aid relations and interactions from a wider, global perspective.

Participants came from both northern and southern organisations, CDRA (South Africa), EASUN (Tanzania), Slum Dwellers International (Zambia federation, Zimbabwe and Netherlands), INTRAC (UK), Cordaid (NL), Mama Cash (NL), HIVOS (NL), and last but not least Interface for Cycling Expertise (NL).  The sessions were facilitated by Equip Worldwide and PSO.

The focus of the seminar was not primarily donor-recipient relationships, but on using participants’ experiences with these relationships to explore alternative and innovative ways of relating, even outside the prevailing aid system. This presented quite a challenge that required out-of- the-box thinking. To enhance such thinking Madurodam was chosen as the seminar venue. It represents the Netherlands as a miniature city, with all important places, buildings, roads and transport systems. Madurodam is a simplified version of the Netherlands, just as our development policies are based on a simplified view of the world. But the real world is far more complex than Madurodam or our development policies, so the challenge was to step out of our 'Madurodam'.

Day 1: Is there more to our relationship than funding?

The key question that was tabled, read: Is the essence of our relationships just funding or is there more to it?

The quest for the ‘essence’ started by first looking at the world around us, giving due attention to the fact that Southern and Northern interpretations of the world differ. Participants were asked to form Northern and Southern editorial boards of important newspapers and phrase five headlines on ‘what they see happening in the world around them’. Inspired by these headlines and the big trends, both groups were invited to formulate their (Northern and Southern) best interests for development.

The focus was on interests and viewpoints instead of standpoints, positions and problems. It was noticeable that interests from the South were in dignity & equality, equal relationships and space to assert oneself with integrity, whereas in the North interests were formulated in terms of  geopolitics, (job) security and feeling good about charity. It took half a day to see the different, but also the many common, interests.

Three real life presentations followed, given by SDI, CDRA and Mama Cash that formed the basis for further dialogue. There were many ‘aha’ moments (you can challenge power relations in a subtle way!) and also ‘oh no! (not again)’ moments (not the same story of progressive versus conservative donors…). Intense discussions alternated between seeking the right tone and the right words, serious attempts to understand the other, and silence.

It was eventually concluded that the “old” North-South dichotomy is not very helpful anymore. From a civil society perspective the focus should preferably be on interests that we all seem to have in common, such as dignity and security. Thus, the diverging point should not be donor-recipient or North-South, but those who have and those who have not. 

Day 2: How do we move forward from here?

The key question on the second day was: given the outcome of the day before, how do we see future relationships? One conclusion was that funding is an essential element, or as one participant put it: ‘If you want to replace money with something else, it should be something very important. What would be of equal value to money?’ It is also about institutional next to personal relationships, relationships across sectors, common interests and joint responsibilities, learning and leadership, equality and dignity as shared values, and flexible ways of organizing.

There was a joint belief that the space for civil society both in the North and the South is narrowing, though each for different reasons. ‘How can we be of help to the North?’, asked a Southern representative, who shared his concern about what he observes to be happening in the North (read: Netherlands). So, civil society has to reinvent itself and open up new spaces, reconnect internationally and to other sectors. This means being open to both different and new relationships.

It was almost at the end of the seminar that a Southern participant shouted ‘Do you hear us? Do you hear what we are saying?’ Someone answered:  ‘As we are here, we want to listen mutually to one another. But do we want to continue this discussion and take it further? Do we feel a personal responsibility and commitment?’ And yes, there was a strong personal interest and commitment to continue the dialogue.

But interestingly enough, to what extent the personal commitment was also an institutional commitment, could not be established for the North! There was also an appeal to PSO to assume its leadership in this process. Because all felt that this seminar has been a start to thinking and looking differently at aid relations. Madurodam was not the place of big changes, but of small steps towards some change. Like a little stone one throws into the water. The seminar got beyond the North-South dichotomy because the dialogue and rethinking were begun in very concrete terms between real people gathered together in one place. They talked about interests and found common ground. And they decided to continue this process. A small steering group will take this further and will come up with ideas for the next step. To be continued.......