Published in 2006, the monography “The White Man’s Burden – Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good” by New York University’s William Easterly addressed, and in fact reached, a broad, especially non-academic audience, with its meaningful title as well as consciously provocative and polarising, yet trenchant line of arguments. WMB is the development economists’ ambitious attempt to explain the structural reasons for the ineffectiveness of the West’s aid programmes for the world’s poor – and how to overcome them.
From the very outset, he makes his diagnosis unambigously clear: a) top-down-plans suffer informational shortage of most diverse realities on the ground, b) development agencies work more effectively with fewer goals and c) unaccountable agencies (as any other entities) perform worse than others, due to missing incentive structures such as feedback loops. Against this background, Easterly draws a sharp line between two roles – Planners and Searchers – which, throughout the book, remain somewhat under-conceptualised in their certainly useful distinction, yet artificially appealing dichotomy.
He convincingly argues that only a significant shift of power towards Searchers can result in a homegrown, long-term and effective (self-)help for the poor (which themselves represent the majority of Searchers). The author does so by drawing heavily on his own experiences made in dozens of developing countries all over the world in his 16-year long capacity as research economist at the World Bank – for him virtually the epitome of all the failures of the systematically blueprint-approach led Planners in the aid sector.
According to Easterly, this shift can only be reached by a reformist rather than revolutionary approach towards the aid sector. The author particularly does so by consistently drawing linkages between Searchers and markets of capitalist economies with their particular social norms and institutions, even claiming markets to be “the greatest bottom-up system in history for meeting people’s needs.” (2006: 76) In addition to that, the only role he foresees for Western assistance is that of meeting the most desperate needs of the poor – until homegrown market-based development takes over.
Table of Contents
- From the very outset, he makes his diagnosis unambigously clear: a) top-down-plans suffer informational shortage of most diverse realities on the ground, b) development agencies work more effectively with fewer goals and c) unaccountable agencies (as any other entities) perform worse than others, due to missing incentive structures such as feedback loops.
- Against this background, Easterly draws a sharp line between two roles · Planners and Searchers - which, throughout the book, remain somewhat under-conceptualised in their certainly useful distinction, yet artificially appealing dichotomy.
- He convincingly argues that only a significant shift of power towards Searchers can result in a homegrown, long-term and effective (self-help for the poor (which themselves represent the majority of Searchers). The author does so by drawing heavily on his own experiences made in dozens of developing countries all over the world in his 16-year long capacity as research economist at the World Bank for him virtually the epitome of all the failures of the systematically blueprint-approach led Planners in the aid sector.
- According to Easterly, this shift can only be reached by a reformist rather than revolutionary approach towards the aid sector. The author particularly does so by consistently drawing linkages between Searchers and markets of capitalist economies with their particular social norms and institutions, even claiming markets to be “the greatest bottom-up system in history for meeting people's needs.\" (2006: 76) In addition to that, the only role he foresees for Western assistance is that of meeting the most desperate needs of the poor – until homegrown market-based development takes over.
- As reasonable as his arguments might appeal on first glance, I will argue in the following that their meaningfulness is significantly weakened by WMB's manifold blind spots.
- Firstly, as already discussed elsewhere (e.g. Broude 2007), in his attempt to construct a coherent story rather than a balanced analysis, Easterly reveals his ignorance of vast bodies of literature on economic development and aid effectiveness.
- Secondly, by implying that it is especially himself raising fundamentally new questions, Easterly not only overstates his own contribution to the wider literature of aid effectiveness;¹ it also limits WMB's potential as an entry point for continued reading within the wider body of literature which, at least since White's eponymous publication in 1968, is often discussed under the term \"aid debate\".
- Thirdly, seemingly trying to lead his own form of “aid debate\", Easterly focuses almost exclusively on delegitimising the “Big Aid”-idea of his intellectual counterpart, Jeffrey Sachs.²
- To conclude, Easterly certainly deserves credit for his attempt to broaden the narrow academic debate of aid effectiveness, even though his monography is all but an outcome of rigorous research.
Objectives and Key Themes
The main objective of the book is to analyze the ineffectiveness of Western aid programmes for developing countries and to offer solutions for overcoming these challenges. Easterly argues that the dominant "Planners" approach to development assistance is flawed and proposes a shift towards a "Searchers" approach, emphasizing local ownership, self-reliance, and market-based solutions.
- The effectiveness of Western aid programmes and the reasons for their shortcomings.
- The "Planners" versus "Searchers" framework for understanding development assistance.
- The role of markets and local ownership in achieving sustainable development.
- The importance of a reformist approach to the aid sector.
- The limitations of the "Big Aid" approach championed by Jeffrey Sachs.
Chapter Summaries
The book explores the limitations of the "Planners" approach to development aid, highlighting the lack of local knowledge and the unintended consequences of top-down interventions. It argues that a shift towards "Searchers" - individuals and organizations who focus on finding solutions and empowering local communities - is crucial for fostering sustainable development. The author critiques the "Big Aid" approach, advocating instead for a more modest and market-oriented approach to development assistance.
Keywords
The main keywords and focus topics of the text are development aid, aid effectiveness, Planners, Searchers, local ownership, market-based solutions, Big Aid, and aid reform. The book challenges conventional wisdom about the efficacy of Western aid programs and emphasizes the importance of local context and empowering communities in achieving sustainable development.
- Quote paper
- Max Schmidt (Author), 2019, "The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Effort to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good". Book review, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/978865
