Communities in developing countries belong to the most vulnerable when it comes to emergencies, such as natural and man-made disasters. Apart from facing acute problems, like collapsed buildings after an earthquake, they deal with chronic issues, i.e. poverty, political instability, and poor health services.
Researchers criticize that international aid organizations often provide services without sharing their knowledge with local actors, thus hindering local, independent development (Chahim/Prakash, 2014). Therefore, it remains to be discussed whether the international community helps developing regions with becoming more resilient and self-sustainable, or if it rather creates a situation of dependency on foreign aid, so called ‘charity hazard’ (Raschky/Weck-Hannemann, 2007).
We assess the working together of local organizations with international aid organizations, so-called ‘Local-Global Partnerships’. These involve local public and nonprofit organizations on different levels, as well as public and nonprofit organizations headquartered outside the developing country (Waugh/Streib, 2006).
Based on the previous argument, we derive the following research questions:
(1) What types of motives for collaboration prevail within internationally based aid organizations?
(2) How does local involvement affect services provided for development aid?
We develop a research model that will be tested using the case of development aid in Myanmar. A survey is conducted amongst local and international organizations engaging in collaboration.
In a first step, we assess the motivational structure prevailing within organisations engaged Local-Global Partnerships. We define two major types of motives affecting the willingness to collaborate: Programmatic needs and organisational goals (Chen/Graddy, 2010). We hypothesise that the prevalence of programmatic needs, such as improving cultural competencies or enhancing geographical coverage, tends to improve the willingness to collaborate equally. The prevalence of organisational goals, such as increasing legitimacy in the eyes of stakeholders, may inhibit partnership with local actors.
In a second step, we regard different forms of local involvement that can be established within Local-Global Partnerships. Based on social exchange theory (Blau, 1964), we suggest that local involvement can lead to a number of benefits for both local and global partners, i.e. with relation to knowledge transfers and local empowerment.
It will be measured how the different types of motives affect the degree of interaction and collaboration between global and local partners. We also identify best practices of local involvement. The results of this study, together with managerial implications on how to design Local-Global Partnerships and to achieve local involvement, will be presented at the conference.
References:
Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
Chahim, D., and Prakash, A. (2014). NGOization, Foreign Funding, and the Nicaraguan Civil Society. Voluntas, 25, 487-513.
Chen, B., and Graddy, E. A. (2010). The Effectiveness of Nonprofit Lead-Organization Networks for Social Service Delivery. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 20, 405-422.
Raschky, P. A. and Weck-Hannemann, H. (2007). Charity Hazard – a Real Hazard to Natural Disaster Insurance? Environmental Hazards, 7(4): 321–329.
Waugh, W. L., and Streib, G. (2006). Collaboration and Leadership for Effective Emergency Management. Public Administration Review, 66(s1): 131-140.
