The concept of decolonisation is one that has been spoken about in the aid and humanitarian sectors for a long time now. Everyone seems well aware that a power imbalance exists between those with the purse strings in the Global North and primary stakeholders responsible for implementation in the Global South; however little is being done to change this dynamic in a meaningful way. In the last decade or so many different NGOs globally have been attempting to grapple with the origins of ‘aid’ being tied up with missionaries and entrenched in white savourism; whilst then simultaneously attempting to ‘decolonise’ their efforts and move towards a more respectful and reciprocal manner of partnership. For me personally, as someone who has been in the sector for over fifteen years, who happens also to be a first generation migrant and women of colour, I have struggled with these half hearted efforts on most occasions. I’ve uncomfortably watched futile and tokenistic outward attempts be pushed in public, in which power is never shifted in actuality but senior leaders and prominent NGOs simply seem to say the ‘right things’ with little tangible actions taken.
It seems the easier pathway towards speaking about power dynamics is the ‘localisation’ concept. Where in most instances NGOs will focus on their programming and claim that their projects are ‘locally led’ due to their national staff being involved in design or evaluation. However, if we as a sector are to be truly committed to decolonisation processes, of shifting the power from ‘us to them’, of being anti racist, then we need to be looking internally and not simply outwardly. We first need to decolonise our own institutions, our own governance and decision-making processes. Whilst it sounds incredibly simple, this means shifting power and unsurprisingly, in most instances, people are very unwilling to commit to changes which means giving their own power up.
As ACFID, the peak body for International Development in Australia, has recently made changes to its Code of Conduct and added commitments to localisation and racial justice into its compliance mechanisms for ANGO’s, I witnessed a deep discomfort within governing bodies to putting these into action. For the most part this is due to a lack of lived experience when it comes to being on the receiving end of colonisation, racism and oppression. Too often Boards of NGOs are overrepresented by Caucasian men and women, of a certain age, from a certain socio-economic background. The result is that meaningful commitments to decolonisation and anti-racism mechanisms, which are monetarily resourced are deprioritised.
The concept of cultural safety is yet another part of this equation for practitioners who are people of colour. As we know, studies which have been conducted globally across the sector show disturbing evidence of microaggressions and deeply entrenched unconscious biases. There is a concerning lack of representation of people of colour in senior leadership positions and on governance bodies across the sector. All too often, the few people of colour who are employed within NGOs in the Global North unwittingly have to take on the burden of responsibility to educate their peers, and push forward decolonisation, anti-racism and cultural safety agenda items; all while competing with other budgetary priorities. From personal experience, this is extremely tiresome. On more than one occasion I have been that person and after months of toiling, of raising awareness and explaining the importance of these concepts; I’ve had my efforts come to nothing as the Board will explain ‘we simply don’t have the funds or time to do everything’. I’ve had to step back from these processes all together as a result as I’ve tried to explain that this is personal for me. I feel deep internal reverberations when the Board or senior leadership that I work for decide that it’s not important enough in the scheme of things to shift resources in order to make meaningful commitments to cultural safety.
What we know for certain is that change is uncomfortable. However, most NGOs have been unwilling (or unable) to come to terms with this fact when it means that their own jobs/power/privilege are on the line. Commitments to decolonisation, cultural safety and shifting power are about more than co-designing project designs with local national staff. These commitments require strategies for including primary stakeholders in governing bodies, for recruiting people with lived experiences and retaining them. The process means individuals in positions of power need to take a deep look within themselves and within the mechanisms that entrench power into the hands of an already privileged few. It includes committing to addressing structural racism, to putting mitigation strategies in place to protect people with lived experience and foster their growth. It also means setting intentional pathways for that growth by providing mentoring opportunities and consistently operating with a learning and adapting approach. It means listening to people of colour, primary stakeholders, local partners and elevating their voices.
Until NGOs are willing to decolonise their own internal processes and look inward, there will be no real progress towards anything except delivering more of the same whilst benignly shouting ‘decolonisation matters’ from the rooftops for all to hear publicly.
I blog for Change. 