The Lords of Poverty: The Power, Prestige, and Corruption of the International Aid Business (Paperback)

~ (Author) "THE WHITE WOMAN, tired but pretty, the one in the blue paisley frock, what exactly is she doing?..." (more)
Key Phrases: intergovernmental experts, global lender, transmigration programme, United Nations, Third World, World Bank (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Product Description

A comprehensive and controversial study of the 60-billion-dollar-a-year world foreign-aid business, Lords of Poverty was a bestseller in hardcover and earned the 1990 H.L. Mencken Award honorable mention for an outstanding book of journalism. Hancock investigates why huge aid projects often fail and demands a response from those in the industry.

Product Details

• Paperback: 256 pages
• Publisher: Atlantic Monthly Press (January 10, 1994)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0871134691
• ISBN-13: 978-0871134691
• Product Dimensions: 8 x 5.4 x 0.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 10.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.6 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (16 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #192,096 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

36 of 36 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The seedy underbelly of Western philanthropy exposed, January 6, 2000

By	Carlo Matthews "carlo" (La Paz Bolivia) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Hancock exposes the seedy underbelly of development/aid as few have dared in the past. Those who live off this industry or have vested interests in spouting an image of Western superiority will rightly feel threatened by a book that unmasks supposed philanthropy and disinterestedness as a shameless money-making and exploitative sham. Hancock is relentless in revealing not only the inefficacy of many major projects, but also the attached strings of big business as well as the morally bankrupt nature of many of its protagonits. In addition, Hancock tellingly explores the mentality and logic behind NGO's as little more than another way of making a buck at the expense of the poor. Where would an industry that depends on poverty for its survival be left if poverty it tackled were to be eradicated? Some who find this study too close to home will claim it is condescending and lacking in solutions (as one reveiwer here does). It is neither. Hancock vents moral indignity in a fitting context and offers alternative approaches which in some cases obviate the necessity for development/aid agencies as we know them altogether ("God forbid!" some will cry). This book deserves to be read by all who sincerely wish to see a change in the way development/aid is carried out and in the appalling poverty it is supposed to alleviate. The career-minded need not apply.

47 of 50 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Fascinating if one sided- a must read for all development workers. Unfortunately outdated, May 29, 2006

By	Sithara Batcha "Sithara" (Washington, DC) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

Disclosure time- I work in the aid industry.

While I agree with much of what Hancock has to say (see below), this book is somewhat one-sided. Aid can reasonably claim a share in some positive world developments, such as rising life expectancy rates, decreased infant mortality, increase in primary education and literacy, growth in per capita GDP, and others. Undoubtedly, success has been patchy, and some areas, such as Sub-Saharan Africa, are worse off than they were fifty years ago, before the advent of the international aid industry. But in detailing its extensive failures, one should not completely ignore its successes (even if they maybe much less than what the aid industry claims).

With all that being said, I think a book of this sort is a must read for all aid workers, to bring us face to face with dark side of our work.

Here is a list of criticisms Hancock has about the international aid industry, and my own impressions.

1. International aid is a big bureaucracy more intent on keeping itself going than helping the poor.

My response- true- International aid is a huge bureaucracy. I spend my time writing and reading memos, and trying to get them 'cleared' as fast as possible. I literally spend no time with the poor.

2. International aid agencies spend money on big, wasteful projects that harm the poor and decimate indigenous societies.

My response: True depending on the development agency/country mission. Agencies (and agency sub-divisions, such as country missions) with lots of funds go this route. The ones that don't have such large accounts hire 'technical experts' instead.

3. Aid agencies hire expensive foreign 'technical experts' who lack local expertise; they bypass the concerns and wisdom of the local population.

True to a large extent. Most experts do not even speak the language of those they are trying to help. Some of our experts do supposedly meet with the local population, and address them through means such as surveys, interviews and 'focus group discussions.' I have no idea how hard they really try, as I sit in the office writing and reading memos. In either case, nothing really innovative comes from these efforts. This is because these experts already have blanket solutions (which are the same throughout the world) and try to impose them on the local populace through 'behavior change and communication' and other similar methods. Thus, the surveys and interviews, to the extent they take place at all, are not really a means to partner with the local people; rather, they are means to learn about the 'barriers' to implementation of blanket solutions.

4. International aid is actually a means for subsidizing western businesses.

Undoubtedly true. As Hancock points out, this is one reason why development agencies go for big projects, and why they hire 'foreign experts.' If I am not spending my time writing and reading memos I am spending my time reading project proposals for my development agency's money. Most of these, of course, come from Western businesses and NGOs. I also spend my time enforcing or waiving regulations stating that organizations that receive our money can only buy goods (including but certainly not limited to automobiles and pharmaceuticals) produced in my nation.

5. International aid has allowed wicked despots to make themselves richer, and allowed ruling thugs to escape responsibility.

True- but I think there has been somewhat more of an emphasis today on funding being tied to concepts such as 'good governance,' controlling corruption, and so on, at least in theory. Of course, reality is sometimes different, in that nations of 'strategic importance' get large amounts of funds despite poor governance, incredible corruption and other failures.

5. Development workers are lazy and mediocre. They are often under-educated, make lots of money, live in big houses, have conferences in the best hotels and eat gourmet cuisine.

Partly true. Most of the aid workers in my particular aid agency are highly educated- the minimum entry requirement is a master's degree, and many of us have PhDs or the equivalent. Our base salary is not very impressive compared to others of a similar educational background- certainly many of us could make much more outside of the official aid industry. That being said, the fringe benefits are quite lavish- one may even say over the top: I admit that I am a single woman living in a large 3-bedroom manor, I attend conferences at ritzy hotels and dine on great food- in an impoverished third world country, all at government, or should I say tax payer, expense.

So, the aid industry has gone seriously wrong- what can we do about it? Unfortunately, while Hancock goes into great depths about the problems of aid, he gives us very few solutions. He believes we should dismantle the aid industry- but then what? How can we as citizens of our planet help our world become a better place? Some possible solutions suggested themselves to me when reading the book- one wonders why Hancock decided not to write an extra chapter with ideas such as these:

1. Clarify and purify intentions. As Hancock points out, the mixed intentions of the aid industry (help the poor AND aid western businesses AND further political interests AND AND AND...) is responsible for many of the problems it has caused.

2. Partner with local communities. I mean truly partner with them, listen to their concerns and ideas, and let them take the lead in coming up with solutions. Note, unlike Hancock, I do think there is a place, with careful thought, for some `Western' knowledge and technology. The best solutions maybe ones arrived at through our collective wisdom. However, don't just try to impose blanket solutions through means such as 'behavior change.'

3. Keep things small as much as possible. Some big projects such as large-scale famine relief, refugee assistance, etc, maybe necessary, but these large-scale efforts are much more prone to corruption, and much more often bypass local communities.

4. Speak the local language- this is the only way to effectively partner with local communities.

Finally, as others have pointed out, the book was written in 1989, so its quite dated. While much of what it says still holds true, an updated version offering modern examples of aid failure would be much more powerful.

30 of 31 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Still very relevant, April 10, 2001

By	Edward Bosnar (Zagreb, Croatia) - See all my reviews

It's too bad that updated editions of "Lords of Poverty" were never published; indeed, even this edition was out of print for several years before this reprint edition. Hancock's writing style here may be a sustained rant, but it nevertheless provides a great deal of useful information and tears down many of the misconceptions most Americans or Europeans may have about the international aid industry. Particularly interesting is his criticism of the various UN agencies and, especially, the World Bank and the IMF - whose projects all too often do more harm than good (if they do any good at all). Perhaps the most disturbing aspect exposed in this book is still quite valid today: that taxpayers in the big donor countries like the U.S., Germany, Japan, the U.K. etc. are footing the bill for many disastrous projects worldwide that make the lives of impoverished populations even worse and often destroy in the environment in the process. "Lords of Poverty" may be dated, but it's still well worth the read.