Thursday, September 27, 2007

ONE has lost its way

I'm taking a few minutes out of my day today to help stop global poverty. I just was forwarded an email from Susan McCue at the One Campaign inviting me to join the "ONE Campus Challenge". I signed Grinnell College up, and now anyone on campus can win points for Grinnell by participating in poverty fighting activities, such as dressing up a pet up in ONE gear, getting its marching band to form the "ONE" logo, or getting other people to join in on the Campus Challenge. I decided to start right away, and for this blog post linking to the Campus Challenge, I'm earning 75 points for Grinnell. I hope it will help us get out of 491st place.

A lot of ONE's activities deal with engagement, and because they seem to be reaching people who wouldn't normally know about global poverty, I have been able to ignore Jeffrey Sachs parading around Africa with Angelina Jolie. Even though they offer great prizes to the school that earns the most points, including a prize that's so great it's still a secret, the Campus Challenge doesn't seem to accomplish anything but get more involved with the Campus Challenge.

And that is my major criticism with the ONE Campaign. It is all about increasing awareness, which is fine, but it doesn't offer any information about how to work on the issues after people become engaged. On the main site for the ONE Campus Challenge, the only information it offers besides the rules of the Challenge is that "our generation has the tools, technology, and resources to end extreme poverty and yet, a billion people still live on less than a dollar a day." The ONE main website has an "issues" page, as well as a "take action" page, but the action either involves wearing ONE gear, getting more people to sign up onto ONE, or contacting Congress. (To be fair, the Campus Challenge also asks students to lobby Congress.) When you decide to "learn how to become an active member of the movement," all that is suggested is more ways to engage more people.

It seems like ONE gives people an easy way out for global poverty. It offers people shirts and wristbands, and people can proudly wear these, saying: "I care about global poverty." Which is great. But that care and concern, even if it is well meaning, cannot make change by itself. The ONE campaign offers no real course of action for individuals, it just puts the power back into the hands of politicians and bureaucrats.

And it is daunting for individuals to try to confront poverty by themselves. That is why ONE has gain popularity through uniting many different concerned individuals. But they have lost their way. They have become self-serving and do not look for effective ways to stop poverty, and instead focus on what they think is right rather than what is working.

So what is working? I will shamelessly plug my own student group, the Social Entrepreneurs of Grinnell. We have raised over $3,000 on campus and loaned almost all of it all over the world to Third World entrepreneurs. There is no reason why other colleges can't do this instead of participating in the Campus Challenge.

I think that the work of SEG is more effective than anything the Campus Challenge can accomplish, but are they really ending poverty? Maybe. I don't know. But SEG is actually doing something. And we certainly are doing more to end poverty than just wearing a ONE wristband.

2 comments:

Linda Armstrong/Mark Raderstorf said...

I spent a few minutes looking at the ONE site. I agree that it doesn't suggest ways to wipe out poverty. I wonder what their plan is.

I did notice that there are many organizations linked to the site. Maybe you should try and get SEG linked? Microinvesting is a much better way to end poverty than wearing a wristband.

Are we to a point where a wristband makes us feel like we are accomplishing something?

Bush just vetoed the SCHIP bill. He claimed it would let families who make $83,000 eligible. What he didn't say was that this was a part of the bill that was denied. And would not be implemented.

More on the NPR website.

Let's start selling wrist bands for health care!! What color should they be?

Love the post. As always.

Mark Root-Wiley said...

Jeff,
Thanks for your post re:MCC. Unfortunately, I doubt I'll get to reading either of those books anytime soon but I think the fact that there are books making great cases for both sides says a lot. It's complicated for sure. I came back to your blog to just skim through past posts and this one really caught my eye, especially related to the Millenium Challenge Corporation.

I think I'm willing to venture a hypothesis that the more effective an organization's tactics are, the more controversial they are. I think that's way to simplified to completely accept, but comparing ONE and the MCC would support it. ONE is popular (which immediately makes me suspect) and the MCC is controversial. ONE doesn't accomplish much and MCC makes a concrete contribution to the field (both in evaluation and aid).

I think Linda makes a great point that we're at a point where wearing a wristband is activism to many people. Sad.

To conclude, SEG is awesome, of course, because it tempers economics with a social conscience. Hooray!