By: Umaimah Adan

On May 25, 2020, Derek Chauvin, a White Police Officer brutally murdered George Floyd an unarmed Black man who was accused of using counterfeit bills (The Associated Press, 2020). Chauvin knelt on Floyd’s neck for 8 minutes and 46 seconds. He has since been charged with second and third degree murder as well as manslaughter.

This case sparked outrage not only in the United States, but on a global scale in what can be described as a global reckoning with systemic racism. A series of protests and demonstrations began in North America and spread to Europe, Asia and Africa.

Although the catalyst of this movement was a case of police brutality in the US, it ultimately revealed the rampant racism that lives everywhere, in particular and unique iterations. In Belgium, protestors demanded that colonial history and violence be redressed. Statues of King Leopold III have been vandalized and set on fire all over the country. Similar displays have occurred in the UK, Brazil and South Korea.

On the continent – in Kenya and South Africa in particular – escalating police brutality has been widely reported on in the midst of the pandemic. Activists have held protests and attempted to hold police accountable for the exceptional violence enacted on citizens in the name of COVID-19 restrictions.

This global awakening has not stopped short at protests and demonstrations, rather it has expanded its reach to examine the anti-blackness and systemic racism present across industries. Travel and tourism, food, entertainment and the beauty industry have all been forced to grapple with the toxic work cultures that have prevailed for far too long.

The field of international development is not immune to such patterns. Rather, racism has not only long permeated internal organizational structures, it comprises the very foundation upon which development was born.

“Do Gooders”

Countless development professionals have publicly shared their experiences with racism at work. Célestin Monga penned a devastating op ed for the Brookings Institution where he detailed the hostility that met him in his new appointment as a senior economist at the World Bank. A minister reacted with horror at the fact that an African had been appointed to oversee her country’s economic condition.

Corrinne Gray shared her experience as a UN employee and the only Black member of her team. Responses to racism faced by staff internally, are often disappointing. Gray recalls being overlooked for a senior leadership position due to fear that she would be unable to “command respect”. Racism within organizations extends beyond lack of upward mobility, in fact people of colour are policed for their behaviour whilst white colleagues are able to express aggression, anger and disrespect with little repercussions. Thus, what emerges is a two-tiered system in terms of treatment and accountability that is predicated on race.

Further, an intersectional lens is necessary to examine such disparities. Katja Iversen, former CEO of Women Deliver, a global advocacy organization has since resigned amid allegations of racism faced by women of colour staff. Brittany Tatum spoke out about black employees and candidates being repeatedly overlooked and underpaid. Moreover, treatment of employees was a symptom of a larger “white saviour complex”. These dynamics are often obscured by the notion that those who work in development are inherently “good”. Such an assumption is harmful in that it allows implicit bias to go unchecked. It does not leave room to probe the historical trajectory of development and humanitarianism, effectively ignoring the underlying logics that maintain a racial hierarchy.

Is Development Racist?

Interrogating the racism prevalent within international development should not stop at accounts of work environments. Rather, the historical trajectory of this field must be examined to better understand its present conditions. Often, the realities faced by people of colour within organizations are reflected and magnified in projects, ultimately harming those they claim to serve.

As Monga notes, many development practitioners exhibit superiority complexes as well as racist tendencies. Such attitudes are evident in the lack of critical engagement within the African context. Local African stakeholders are rarely given the space to share their relevant, contextual knowledge. Rather, “experts” rely on their technical knowledge to set policy recommendations. This imbalance of power is especially harmful as it is often leveraged to determine financial aid amounts. Thus local policymakers are incentivized to center donor approval in their work.

The subordination of race in development discourse is inextricably linked to the inequity of development practice. The hierarchies which place developed countries in a position of authority over developing countries, are located in a legacy of empire and colonialism. Contrary to the prevailing assumption of the neutrality and inherent good of development practice, it is a result of deliberate choices deemed “technical”. The field of international development originated in the post WW2 context as part of a clear agenda enacted by Western allies. Institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF were established in order to maintain powerful forces. Rather than altruism, it is often self-interest that drives the present donor agenda.

Decolonizing Development

Calls to rethink the imbalances at the center of development and humanitarianism are not new. Practitioners from the Global South have long vocalized their critiques and also presented alternative methods. CEO of Oxfam India, Amitabh Behar has questioned why NGOs in the South are overseen by large decision making bodies in the North.

Amongst the diverse voices calling for change, African women have been pioneers of this movement. Degan Ali has long called to shift the power, a move that would necessitate giving more control and decision making to organizations based in the South. Ali helms Adeso (African Development Solutions) founded by her mother and headquartered in Kenya. Through her work with Adeso, she saw firsthand the burdens imposed on local NGOs. The stark realities of funding discrepancies, where only 2% of humanitarian funding is directly allocated to local organizations. Further, alongside the funding challenges is an air of saviourism that forces local actors to mold themselves to meet the expectations of Western partners. Ali notes that it feels like “you are a beggar standing outside, asking and pleading to get through the door”.

Instead of perpetuating the harmful cycle, Adeso has been at the forefront of creating change. What began as an idea, led to the creation of the Global Network for Southern NGOs that comprises of 100 organizations in 30 countries. The network has since successfully implemented a proposal for donor countries to channel 20% of funding directly into local NGOs.

Stephanie Kimou is another leader in the movement to decolonize development. She refers to dismantling the white gaze in her work and championing local expertise. Kimou is the founder of Population Works Africa, a consulting firm which centers African led solutions. Population Works also provides courses for NGOs to better understand and implement equitable partnerships.

Development and humanitarianism have upheld a legacy of inequity and neocolonialism since their inception. Many of the solutions that have been lauded by practioners as best practice have perhaps done little to generate sustainable development, and even less to undo centuries of exploitation. However, leaders like Kimou and Ali are part of a shift in the discourse and landscape, that has changed the tone from one of resignation, to true optimism and resilience.