Director of MSF/Doctors Without Borders in Belgium blasts the opportunistic charity response to major disasters.
Earlier this month (October 5), the London School of Economics (annual accounts) sponsored a debate on disaster response that featured the provocative views of Gorik Ooms, director of the Belgium office of Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (international financial report). Only the briefest summary is available on-line from the Reuters Alert Net ("Don't Ask, Don't Give.")
Dr. Ooms was highly critical of the large number of charities who accept donations after major emergencies, because most donations are too late to be of real use. Then these charities—with little real experience—get in the way as they attempt interventions to use up their earmarked donations. The real relief work, he notes, takes place in the first week after a disaster, using resources that were paid for and warehoused long before.
His explanation on the MSF response to the tsunami, which was criticized (by other charities) for telling donors that it had received enough for the disaster just a week in:
- The dead remained dead.
- After 48 hours, the survivors needed very little in the way of medical relief.
- Long-term reconstruction is beyond the capacity of MSF, as it is for most charities/nonprofits/NGOs.
The article notes that Dr. Ooms admitted that his suggestion goes against public sentiment in times of disaster, but that nevertheless charities should take on the task of educating the public rather than take donations they can't use effectively.
This is not an insurmountable task, as the whole multi billion dollar insurance industry is built on the notion that you have to prepare for disasters, personal and natural. Nobody particularly likes the message, but it is effective.
So it is unfortunate that this message receives so little attention in the mainstream press. (Thanks to Don't Tell the Donor and Charity Blog Nework for picking it up.)
Comments