Community Development Principles
for Poverty Alleviation
1. Distinguish Between Development and Relief
The first step that one must take in poverty alleviation is to determine whether the poor people are in a context that requires "relief," "rehabilitation," or "development." Again, a failure to distinguish between these three can result in doing considerable harm to the poor and to ourselves. A context in which "relief" is the appropriate intervention is one in which a crisis such as a tsunami has plunged people into a downward spiral in which they are unable to help themselves. The appropriate response to such a situation is to provide immediate, temporary aid to stop the bleeding for the powerless victims. "Rehabilitation" is the correct intervention in a context in which people are able to participate in returning their lives to their pre-crisis levels. An example of this would be the situation in Indonesia six months after the tsunami hit. Finally, development is a context in which people are able to participate in improving their lives above the status quo level by experiencing reconciliation in their four fundamental relationships. Unfortunately, many Christians fail to recognize that "not all poverty is created equal," and treat all situations as though they are "relief contexts" when the vast majority of situations require "rehabilitation" or "development." As a result, handouts are given to poor people who are capable of helping themselves, further marring their self-identity and undermining their capacity to be stewards over creation. Therefore, because of this, the poor are "poorer" than ever before, as are those who provided the relief inappropriately. Christians must have basic guidelines for discerning whether relief, rehabilitation, or development is the appropriate intervention in any context.
To learn more, read the article "Relief and Development: The Distinction is More Than Academic" found in Issue #3 of the 2007 edition of Mandate.
2. Take an Asset-based Approach
A "needs-based" approach starts by asking what is wrong with a community, while an "asset-based" approach begins by asking community residents, "What gifts has God given to the individuals and institutions in this community?" There is no doubt that the effects of the fall have created all sorts of needs in any community; however, an approach which starts by focusing on what is wrong instead of on what is right exacerbates the shame and marred identity that is so endemic to low-income communities. The needs-based approach also communicates that solutions to the community's problems must come from outside of that community, thereby furthering the notion on the part of both the economically poor and non-poor that the latter are necessary to save the former. Such a perspective paralyzes the economically poor from taking initiative to steward their own communities and furthers the "god-complexes" of the economically non-poor. Several tools and methods exist to implement an asset-based approach, including Appreciative Inquiry and Asset Mapping, tools that lead members in a community to themselves identify the assets and gifts within their community.
To learn more, read the article "From the Director: What's Right with You?" found in Issue #1 of the 2008 edition of Mandate.
3. Implement a Participatory Interventions
Conditioned by a fast-food culture which sells as many identical hamburgers as possible, Christians tend to approach low-income communities in a "blueprint" fashion. We conceive of problems and solutions in board rooms and missions committee meetings and then go out and impose those solutions on low-income communities in a cookie-cutter fashion on as large a scale as possible. By failing to take into account the particularities of each cultural setting, this approach has resulted in failed attempts at development all over the world during the post-WW II era. More importantly, this approach perpetuates a devastating message from the economically non-poor to the economically poor, "We have all the answers. We have all the know-how. We are here to save you!" Again, both parties become "poorer" in the process. In contrast, participatory approaches to development include the economically poor in the conceptualization, design, execution, and evaluation of any intervention. The inherent assumption is that the economically poor have knowledge, insights, and abilities to be stewards over their own communities, all of which need to be respected by the economically non-poor.
Successful poverty alleviation is about walking with people in such a way that both they and we experience Christ's reconciliation of our relationships with God, self, others, and creation. In this perspective, poverty alleviation becomes less about money and more about building relationships. It becomes less about products and more about the processes pursued. It becomes less about doing something to them and more about being with them. All of this takes more time than most of us are willing to spend and requires a far more nuanced use of money than is commonly understood by the churches.
For more on a participatory approach, refer to the article "A Participatory Party in Mozambique" found in Issue #2 of the 2008 edition of Mandate.
|
