June 12, 2011
A recent 60 Minutes investigation found that best-selling author and philanthropist, Greg Mortenson, may not be all he has cracked himself up to be. The ex-mountain climber has told the story many times of being rescued by Pakistani villagers and discovering how terrible their educational facilities were. One thing led to another and he eventually built them a school, and that school led to hundreds more around the country. His books, Three Cups of Tea and Stones into Schools have sold millions, and his Central Asia Institute, a registered US charity, has taken in tens of millions of dollars in donations.
But 60 Minutes told a different story, one repeated on television and in newspapers worldwide: Mortenson was not rescued by villagers. He did build a school – many, in fact – but not as many as he says, and a lot are simply not being used. The charity, 60 Minutes said, was paying for a lot of the promotion of Mortenson’s phenomenally successful books, but all proceeds go to Mortenson, not the charity. Mortenson refused to answer questions put to him by CBS news.
There is a double tragedy in this story, one reported in the media, the other created by the media. The first is that Mortenson, perhaps a well-meaning naïf, seems not to have delivered on his promise. That will fuel the cynicism about foreign aid that his books did so much – for a while — to dispel. People will add this to the list of reasons for not supporting development assistance.
The bigger tragedy is that Mortenson – and the media that so lionized him for five years – created an idea of development that is fundamentally fictional. Yes, individuals can make a difference, but genuine development is much more complex than well-meaning Westerners charging about like Lady Bountiful, wiping the tears from the faces of unhappy children. Although Three Cups of Tea is all about schools, it contains no discussion about what goes on inside a school: education. The closest the book came to education, was when Mortenson’s wife made her first trip to Pakistan and stopped in Islamabad to buy some appropriate books for one of the school libraries. How might she have known what was appropriate for a rural Pakistani school? What language were the books written in?
The same shallowness bedevils other silver bullets, or at least how they are purveyed. The promise of microfinance is that a $25 loan can get a poor family out of destitution. Child sponsorship will save one of those crying kids that are sold on television like a buffet lunch for people wanting a quick feel-good opportunity. Too harsh? As part of a broader program of training and economic opportunity, microfinance can help. If it supports solid development programs, a child sponsorship agency can make a contribution.
But it’s time for an adult discussion about development. There are no silver bullets; poverty cannot be ended with small, one-off feel-good investments. Development takes time and money, and it requires strong support and leadership from the people who will benefit. It requires consistency as well, from the $25 donor and from institutional donors like the Canadian International Development Agency, which in recent years has been about as constant and dependable as Wile E. Coyote. If you want to support education in Pakistan, ask about teachers and curricula and running costs – the same questions you would ask in this country. If you want to support children, find organizations that support their parents. Paternalism only works if it is applied by genuine parents, not faraway benefactors. If you want to make a $25 loan through Kiva or some other mechanism, ask how borrowers are being advised, and ask how a poor person can find an investment good enough to repay the $25 with interest in a year, if not months. Think about it. There is a lot of great work being done out there, but there is no substitute for hard work, experience and long-term commitment.