Coralie Oddy

According to research conducted across the UK, France, Germany and the USA, 80% of people agree with this statement: "Despite investment in aid, not much has changed for those in poverty over the last twenty years." But this statement is false.

Switching the story: how to change the narrative on development

According to research conducted by Bond across the UK, France, Germany and the USA, 80% of people agree with this statement:

‘Despite investment in aid, not much has changed for those in poverty over the last twenty years.’ [1]

Extreme poverty has actually halved over the last twenty years

Clearly, 80% of people have formed a belief about development based on unreliable evidence. Surely if we show them the real facts – with hard evidence to back up our claims - we can create a different attitude to international development and maximise giving?

In fact, the evidence would suggest it isn’t as simple as that. Statistics on poverty and the impact we can make convinced me to take the Giving What We Can pledge, but it is probably precisely because I’m drawn to statistics and evidence-based research that effective altruism appealed to me in the first place. It makes sense that facts and figures would help to convince the stereotypical Effective Altruist – the analyst, the programmer, the maths or philosophy graduate– but what of the population at large?

The 2014 Narrative Project sought to understand the public perception of international development, and how changing our ‘stories’ about aid can promote positive engagement

The research found that there was a generally negative perception of international development, with a focus on waste and what doesn’t work – rather than what does. Foreign aid is viewed as ‘a good idea done badly’.

the project identified an ‘undecided audience’ who - if reached in the right way - could significantly increase support for development and become effective donors.

The Narrative Project found that around a third of the public are ‘engaged’ with international development – they have some knowledge of the issues and regard ending poverty as at least ‘somewhat important’ – 

this represents a reachable audience for the Effective Altruism movement.

Yet the data on progress which so appeals to ‘natural’ EAs may fail to influence this group. Personal beliefs heavily impact the weight we give to facts. Perhaps instead of providing new research and clear infographics, 

we should be focusing on changing prevailing narratives about the impact of international development by telling stories which truly resonate with the public.

This formed the second part of The Narrative Project’s research. They explored the themes that were the most influential in creating positive perceptions of development and increasing the likelihood of donating. 

We need to emphasise these themes when we discuss Effective Altruism with potential new supporters

. The theme of self-reliance was found to be highly influential. We should always emphasise that the ‘end goal’ of development is to give everyone the opportunity to support themselves and achieve independence.

. We can make the moral case that opportunity is unfairly distributed, and people cannot help where they are born. We should emphasise that with the right support, people in poverty can access opportunities for independence and help themselves.

. We need to talk about people in poverty as individuals who share our aspirations and demonstrate ingenuity, ambition and pride. We should avoid ‘pity language’ and an overemphasis on suffering; while pity-based appeals create an instant emotional response, long-term they actually decrease engagement with development issues [4].

. We need to show that development works through the efforts of both donors and recipients. We can do this by highlighting the active role people in poverty take in achieving self-reliance, and show that effort, risk and responsibility is shared between developed and developing nations. Donor countries and celebrity patrons should not be positioned as ‘heroic’.

. Empowering women and girls resonates with the public, as this is something we can relate to in our own lives.

Using these themes, we can change beliefs about development, and create a new narrative about effective ways to eliminate poverty. For example, the UK NGO network Bond - a partner in The Narrative Project’s creation - highlighted ONE’s 

 for their ‘Poverty is Sexist’ campaign as a great example of the new narrative [5].

By focusing on empowering women and demonstrating shared values of pride, ambition and individual will to succeed, the video inspires action where it could have easily inspired pity and reinforced stereotypes about the developing world.

Switching the story on development can be the difference between deepened commitment and donor fatigue. By understanding what appeals to the public, we can make our own appeals significantly more effective.

Action on the refugee crisis and action on global poverty: thoughts, facts and ways to do good better. 

The Syrian refugee crisis has recently dominated news and social media. Away from the horror and devastation (not to mention the shocking apathy from some parties), 

I have been deeply struck by the compassion and support from ordinary people.

I know somebody who organised a donation drop for clothes and essential items for refugees in Calais that was inundated with contributions. My newsfeed keeps me constantly updated on news items about the refugee situation, shared and shared again with overwhelmingly sympathetic commentary and multiple calls for action. I’ve been asked to 

 by people I’ve never considered remotely political, and tens of thousands of people 

 to show their solidarity with refugees, giving up their time for an act of anonymous compassion.

My first thought on this is that I am tremendously proud, and somewhat awed, at our capacity for empathy.

 We are moved so deeply by the human desire to reduce suffering that we campaign tirelessly on issues that do not impact our own lives, and give generously to those we have never met and are never likely to meet. 

Our willingness to help others who are suffering acts as the measure of our humanity. We must keep up our efforts.

This chain of events has also led me to consider how we respond to the suffering of others in different contexts. As an effective altruist, I am concerned with how we can alleviate the most suffering, for the most people, in the best ways. While doubtless a humanitarian catastrophe we should all concern ourselves with, the current refugee crisis is an extremely complex problem to solve on both logistical and political levels. In contrast, we have a 

 that gives us comparatively straightforward guidance on what we can do to ease suffering and prevent deaths in the developing world.

 protects children from diseases that cause malnutrition, stunted growth, cognitive defects and increased risk of infection from HIV/AIDS. The immediate reduction in human suffering is immense, and long term these benefits to health support people to build better lives for themselves. The cost? Around 81p per treatment. It is with good reason that SCI is considered one of the 

But if that is the case, why has almost nobody heard of SCI? 

Given that the problem is so much easier to solve, and the level of human suffering broadly comparable

 (bereavement, poverty, physical pain and lack of opportunity are arguably just as bad whether caused by war or disease), 

why do we not see the same level of engagement the refugee crisis has sparked?

The refugee crisis is all over our media.

 Obviously, people are engaged with the suffering caused by the refugee crisis because it is constantly in the news. Also, because the situation throws up controversial issues (relating to immigration, for example), more people are inclined to voice their opinion. People feel they must argue for compassion as not everyone shares their views. This leads to more general discussion, but also an ‘us and them’ mentality which prompts people to validate the beliefs of others who share the same views on the crisis as themselves, encouraging action to be taken. 

With issues like extreme poverty in the developing world, the take-home point is this: 

just because an issue isn’t in the news, it doesn’t mean it isn’t newsworthy.

 Compared to the relatively sudden Syrian crisis, extreme poverty is a constant, and therefore is rarely commented on in the news. Yet it is because poverty is a constant fact of life for millions of people that we should be acting.

We know from the success of highly publicised events like Children in Need and Comic Relief that media coverage of extreme poverty creates empathy and a surge of generosity from the general public. We need to keep talking about poverty and how best to alleviate it by using relatable, human stories to promote effective charities as much as possible.

As with the refugee crisis, sparking a debate could increase engagement. 

 are a brilliant way to get people thinking about which charities alleviate suffering most effectively, and how and where we should be donating to make the biggest impact.

This refugee crisis is a relatively recent turn of events.

 In contrast, because of the notion that poverty is a ‘constant’, we think of it as being somehow ‘without end’; something which has always been present and always will be. Clearly, this is untrue: between 1981 and 2013, the number of people in the developing world living in extreme poverty has 

 from 50% to 21%, despite a 59% increase in population size.

To incentivise people to take action on extreme poverty, we need them to know what has been achieved as well as what still needs to be done. We should be promoting success stories and celebrating achievement, constantly working to discredit the idea that extreme poverty is a problem which can never be eliminated.

Public interest in the refugee crisis will fall and face the same difficulties - like apathy and lack of publicity - that reduce action on extreme poverty.

 Actions will lag long before they cease to be needed. Continuing to talk about issues, changes and, importantly, successes in the struggle is key to keeping up engagement with the refugee crisis and reducing the apathy that comes when a problem cannot be solved simply. I personally will continue to take action on the current crisis, and on global poverty as a whole. Which brings me to....

Emergencies like the Syrian crisis and ongoing problems like global poverty MUST be acted on, but possibly in different ways.

 In terms of global poverty, we know that giving to effective charities (such as those 

) is one of the most effective ways to impact the problem, but the same can't be said for emergency relief. According to the 

, emergency aid is one of the worst uses of donations in terms of effectively eliminating suffering.

 while donations to support refugees are unsustainable, 

grassroots political campaigning and lobbying may be the most effective way for ordinary individuals to limit the suffering of refugees

. We need to consider each of the issues we care about rationally, examining the evidence for what the best thing is to do in each situation.

We should be acting on both emergency situations and the ongoing battle to end extreme poverty, but also recognising that these situations are different and require distinct tactics to affect the most good.

 While our heart should call us to action, our head should tell us what needs to be done. Let's work on emergencies and ongoing poverty using the best tools we can, for as long as it takes.

Coralie Oddy

Articles

Switching the story: how to change the narrative on development

Action on the refugee crisis and action on global poverty: thoughts, facts and ways to do good better.