Sustainability…Are We Doing More Harm Than Good? (2006.08.21)

One of the aspects of the Peace Corps that made it attractive for me was their focus on sustainable change. What exactly does that mean? Well, I suppose I could sum it up as the difference between giving a man a fish and teaching a man to fish. The Peace Corps understands that it does no good for us to come in and simply drill wells or build latrines and leave. Sure, it gives some people water or a clean place to use the bathroom, but it’s only a temporary solution, it’s not something that will last. In the grand scheme of things, anyone can come in and build something, that’s easy. The trick is getting the community to want to change things on their own. Educate them on why latrines are important or how washing your hands prevents diarrhea and that will make them want to change their habits. This is a much more challenging task. The social aspects of development work are FAR more important than the “tangible” results. This is something that took a little getting used to for me, I came in thinking I was going to be building bathrooms and digging ditches myself, but the real trick is getting the people to do it on their own. I originally thought I’d be good at this because I am pretty good with a shovel (thanks to my Dad and his endless piles of dirt/sand/gravel) and know my way around some useful tools, but that is only one tiny part of it. Sure, I will help out when it’s ditch-digging time, but it does the people no good for me to dig the ditch for them. Yes, I will personally be drilling wells for people, but by the end of my service I hope to have trained well technicians in all of these surrounding communities so that they can build rigs and drill wells on their own. The simple technology we use makes this an absolutely possible reality and after a few wells, a technician can go out and make some money drilling wells for people, which helps out the economy much more than if it were just me drilling and then it ending when I leave. It sounded kind of funny at first, but they told us in training that we personally should do the least amount of work possible…the locals should be doing it. The less actual physical work we do, the more effective we are. The fact is, I’m not going to be here forever, and even though there will probably be a few more volunteers in this site after I’m gone, the Peace Corps isn’t going to be here forever. It does no one any good to just build things without doing the social development first.

Here’s an example. One of the biggest problems in Hardeman is the amount of plastic trash there is around. There is no garbage dump or recycling center around, so all the plastic bottles they drink from and plastic bags they carry things in just end up being burned or thrown in the streets. It’s not unbearable yet, but in about 20 more years the streets will be filled with trash. Some of you know I’m pretty into picking up litter (more so than most, I’d say) and I could definitely go around and pick up a bunch of this plastic trash, toss it in a huge sack and take it with me to the city when I go and deliver it to the recycling center there. It really wouldn’t be all that hard for me to do, and actually, I would enjoy it. But, it would be MUCH more effective if I could teach the community first about the dangers of burning plastic (birth defects and the possibility of sterility when young girls inhale the fumes…not to mention the environmental effects), get a trash collection system going and maybe even start a garbage dump. Get them to change their habits. I said it would be much more effective, but it’s also much more challenging. It’s not that the people are lazy necessarily, it’s just that they don’t know any better. The modern world has overtaken places like this without bringing all of the necessary amenities. Sure, plastic bottles are great, but not if you don’t have a garbage dump to put them in. Everyone has a TV and a stereo here, but most have dirt floors and one water spicket for drinking, bathing, washing and cooking. The gap is just getting wider and wider.

Sustainability is the challenge all of us do-gooders need to start thinking about. Does it really do some good for a small Midwestern church to send a boatload of money and a youth group to a tiny third world Mexican town to build a modern church or even a house in the middle of a town that can’t even afford to pave the roads or get water to everyone? My answer would be no, because what happens is then that little Mexican town becomes dependent on the outside, and begins to expect support like they have gotten in the past and if for whatever reason the money dries up, then they are just left with a nice building for which they can’t even afford new light bulbs, much less pay the electric bill. It’s a tough argument…should we help a few if we can’t help everyone? And should we help them if we’re not going to make sure the work can continue after we’re gone? Often times, there is money that needs to be spent on non-profit work…money from the budget that needs to be used up. Whether it’s a religious organization or an NGO, their donators need to see that their money is being spent. The crappy part is, building things is easy but expensive, which helps them spend their money in an easy way. Doing social development work is much more challenging while at the same time less costly, so it’s not always as attractive. But the fact of the matter is, the social development work is much more valuable in the long run.

Obviously I don’t have all the answers and this is just one person’s opinion…it’s a sticky argument, but I’d like to hear what anyone has to say in defense or opposition of what I’ve said here. Let’s get some chatter going.