By Talitha Smadu
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have played an increasingly integral role in the development of the global community in the past few decades. Many NGOS focus not only on development in the general sense, but also specifically on lessening the gap between the Global South and the Global North. More and more people of all ages are offering themselves up for voluntary services around the world through NGOs. Although the numbers of volunteers are impossible to precisely identify, they are increasing annually, and the type of volunteering varies as well. In order to sustain development in any given country, the engagement of the people in that country is necessary—not only as recipients but as actors as well. The United Nations (UN) contends that “inclusion, participation, ownership, solidarity and social cohesion leading to real capacity development and social capital” (“Volunteering for development”, 2004, para. 2) of individuals are all important to maintain development in a country. While some humanitarians volunteer for long periods of time and work in labour intensive capacities, like building houses and schools, others volunteer for short, intermittent spans and work in capacities that focus on human services development, like teaching and care-taking (Sherrard, Stringham, Sow, & McBride, 2006).
Canadian University Service Overseas (CUSO), founded in 1961, is a Canadian based Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) that focuses on sending volunteers abroad to address development and poverty alleviation, and provides a good example of how important volunteerism is in development. Volunteerism in the North, in fact, is seen to be invaluable; however, the importance of volunteerism, locally and internationally, is only beginning to catch on in the South (“Volunteering for development”, 2004). However, it is people working together—volunteers from other countries with local community members—that makes the difference in long-term capacity building and development. Looking at the work of a variety of NGOs, including CUSO, it is impossible to ignore that volunteers alone make a difference, but local volunteers working in tandum with volunteers from abroad is a powerful resource that less-developed countries cannot ignore (“Volunteering for development”, 2004).
This paper will examine the role of NGOs and volunteerism generally and including the role volunteers play in development by means of supporting both targeted projects and capacity development in general. CUSO, which focuses on sending university-educated volunteers to other countries to support development, will be described by examining its history, values, accomplishments, challenges, and current and future opportunities. The paper will also demonstrate how the work of this NGO aids in effectively neutralizing the negative effects of government aid and intervention. A case study of the work of CUSO in Mozambique will serve as an exemplar to demonstrate the work of this NGO.
The Role of NGOs in the World Today
The role of NGOs has been much more significant and visible in civil society in the past 50 years. NGOs have no doubt had an impressive and successful effect in certain development areas, such as “in raising the equity stakes, improving the quality of overseas development aid, fostering Southern NGO work at the international level and organizing quick and effective humanitarian assistance” (Rooy, 2000, p. 300). It is clear that these accomplishments are made possible because of the work and valiant efforts of volunteers—primarily from the Global North, but increasingly from the Global South as well. Sherrard, Stringham, Sow, and McBride (2006) describe voluntary service as “an organized period of engagement and contribution to society sponsored by public or private organizations, and recognized and valued by society, with no or minimal monetary compensation to the participant” (p. 165).
As Sherrard et al (2006) noted, both government and non-governmental organizations have been engaged in supporting development throughout the world. Before the 1960s, the Canadian government’s foreign policy tended to drive the kind of development work and targets of international assistance, because it was the Canadian government that provided the development support (Trilokekar, 2010). In fact, Trilokekar (2010) contends that the government led not only the international assistance policy, but also the academic relations policy.
International volunteerism has flourished, especially since the end of the Second World War. Development and poverty alleviation through volunteerism are addressed both by government institutions, like the Peace Corps, and by NGOs, like CUSO. Global civil society has begun to play a larger and more significant role in global affairs, and is now taking charge of world issues opposed to being simple observers. Volunteers are able to take action “when nation states fail to promote global peace, international understanding, and the well being of the world’s poor” (Sherrard et al, 2006, p. 164). And if this volunteerism were to cease, it is imminent and apparent that specific parts of society would desist (“Volunteering for development”, 2004). Most civil society volunteers tend to come from the Global North, or more developed nations, who target their efforts to the Global South, or less-developed nations—commonly understood as Third World countries. However, there has been a growing movement of volunteer work across different borders and in different directions; for example, CUSO sends volunteers to both less-developed nations and developed nations (Sherrard et al, 2006). In fact, Rooy (2000) believes that Northern NGOs were instrumental in the formation of an “international system of humanitarian assistance” (p. 311), and although not politically affiliated or associated with a particular government—sometimes detrimental to development—these NGOs were able to make substantial and effective short-term change, particularly in instances of natural disasters where immediate and short-term change is needed (Rooy, 2000). Canada is a good example of a country making an impact—it is one of the most generous donors in the Global North, and in the early stages of CUSO, Canada increased its expenditure rapidly between the 1960s and 1970s (Trilokekar, 2010).
Entering into the twenty-first century, Canadian development projects have been criticized as being inappropriately tied through federal government stipulations regarding the aid—“43% of Canadian bilateral aid in 2004 was tied to the purchase of Canadian goods and services, in sharp contrast to an 8% average for all OECD countries, with Norway, the United Kingdom, and Sweden effectively at zero” (Trilokekar, 2010, p. 134). Roopa Desai Trilokekar (2010) goes on to note that:
The different historical roots of international development and international academic relations policies within the government of Canada influenced the nature of programs, the level of funding and thus their impact on the university internationalization initiatives. These influences also changed over time as the policy directives in both areas shifted, in this case, to a focus on economic imperatives within Canada’s foreign policy. (p. 136)
However, CUSO, through its own foreign policy and development projects, effectively counteracts the negative impacts of this kind of tied foreign aid, both in perception and in reality. Volunteers from Canadian universities have proven to be a beneficial avenue to establish non-partisan, long-lasting and equitable development initiatives.
Canadian NGOS and the Importance of the Role of Universities
Canada has been a longtime, highly-valued and contributing member of the international community and with this membership comes the duty of development. However, Canada has adopted—and has been further recognized for exercising—“‘soft power’ through avenues such as international cultural relations, to promote its political, economic and cultural interests” (Trilokekar, 2010, p.131). Unlike many other countries, Canada is further recognized for its distinct level and quality of investment in the Global South. The programs established by Canada are individually designed and executed; in the context of Canada’s own pre-colonial, colonial and modern history, its NGO work also reflects cultural values, and is indicative of its international relationships, along with its political and economic contexts (Trilokekar, 2010). Trilokekar (2010), states that universities and higher learning facilities are essential in determining Canada’s engagement in development, both governmental and non-governmental, in overseas development assistance (ODA) and international cultural relations (ICR). This relationship is important in understanding the rationale behind certain development policies (Trilokekar, 2010). Marvin Bartell (2003) concurs that the role of universities is essential in “[bringing] about substantive, integrated, university-wide internationalization in response to pervasive and rapidly changing global environmental demands” (p. 43). Over the last few decades, however, higher-education institutions, such as universities, have come under more and more scrutiny for not adapting as quickly to the “rapidly changing social, technological, economic and political forces emanating from the immediate as well as from the broader postindustrial external environment” (Bartell, 2003, p. 43).
Universities and educational institutions are systematically moving closer and closer to the development world and bringing the idea of development to the young minds of today who will become the leaders of tomorrow. Universities are not only offering courses on development, but also on the NGOs that are important to this development, and many offer complete degree programs dedicated to further understanding development (Rooy, 2000). Therefore the idea of collaborating universities and NGOs seems inevitable—and the relationship that ensues functions as a critical method of transforming less-developed nations in a systematic and apolitical way.
The Beginning: CUSO
Canadian University Service Overseas (CUSO) was launched in 1961, when Canadian Overseas Volunteers (COV) and other university based organizations, including Canadian Voluntary Commonwealth Service (CVCS) and Le Mouvement Universitaire National pour le Developpement Outre-Mer, began to move beyond university borders in 1960. These university-based volunteer movements began to create a campaign across the country, and by 1961, CUSO was created as a consolidating move toward national volunteer work (“CUSO-VSO”, n.d.; “2009/10 Annual Report–CUSO-VSO”, n.d.; Rooy, 2000). CUSO was originally formed as a non-profit organization that sent young people from universities across Canada abroad to do volunteer work. In 1961, CUSO sent its first group of volunteers to India, Ceylon, and Jamaica. This small group of young, fearless university students primarily worked as teachers in the countries they inhabited (“2009/10 Annual Report–CUSO-VSO”, n.d.). The primary focus of CUSO is on sending human resources—the volunteers—who are well-educated, usually young, enthusiastic and energetic, and not just money and supplies to aid in development and poverty alleviation. CUSO has an international reputation, and is acknowledged widely for its work. Focusing on a particular aspect of development services and aid helped CUSO hone in on what exactly it wanted to give the world. The motto the volunteers lived by was “‘serve and learn,’ and their aim was to help the new nations reach self-sufficiency while increasing their own knowledge of the world” (“2009/10 Annual Report–CUSO-VSO”, n.d., p. 15). The ideas spread deeper into educational institutions across Canada, and by 1963, the number of volunteers increased to nearly 100, working in over 15 countries (“2009/10 Annual Report–CUSO-VSO”, n.d.). CUSO as an organization and via its volunteers has had a great impact on the international relations of Canada with foreign bodies. Rooy (2000) notes that as the first volunteers CUSO sent returned home, “awareness took on a greater political force at home and the beginnings of a formal aid lobby in Canada took shape” (p. 303).
Metamorphosis: CUSO-VSO
The joining of CUSO with the Canadian chapter of the international Voluntary Services Overseas (VSO) happened in 2008. Both of these volunteer agencies are pioneers in the development world and both have years of experience. The underlying principle of volunteers being agents of change was the common denominator in this merger. The Canadian chapter of VSO international is the North American advocate for this organization and recruits volunteer prospects from a variety of other member countries. With this merger, CUSO-VSO has collectively placed over 15,000 volunteers in over 40 countries, and is part of one of the world’s largest development agencies, VSO, which has placed over 45,000 volunteers in developing countries since 1958 (“CUSO-VSO”, n.d.). CUSO-VSO, today, promotes an agenda of sustainable development, achieved through volunteer aid. Development is not entirely economic, but more targeted at building the communities and lives of the impoverished people involved. In 2010, volunteers from CUSO were in over 34 countries all around the world, with an average age of 41 years old, exemplifying that today, CUSO is not simply a university-based organization, but reaches out to all members of society (“2009/10 Annual Report–CUSO-VSO”, n.d.).
Volunteerism advancing development: CUSO-VSO
CUSO recognizes that the act of volunteering is essential for change, and the transfer of skills is a critical part of the solution for advancing development. The organization and deployment of university students is an important feature of this skills transfer, considering the wealth of knowledge readily available in this group of volunteers. CUSO-VSO also prides itself on supporting fair trade and human rights advancement, since economic inequality is rampant throughout the world and detrimental to development (“CUSO-VSO”, n.d.). CUSO’s volunteers:
[H]elp build social infrastructure by sharing their expertise and experience. They work collaboratively with overseas partner groups on locally and nationally managed projects. [Volunteers] focus on long-term solutions that will have an impact for generations to come. CUSO-VSO recruits people who have the professional skills and perspectives needed to work in solidarity with organizations in countries facing poverty and disadvantage. (“2009/10 Annual Report–CUSO-VSO”, n.d., p. 2)
Today, CUSO has expanded beyond universities, but the importance of knowledge and capacity building is still prominent. Today volunteers come from a variety of backgrounds and offer many different professional advantages to their volunteer experience (“CUSO-VSO”, n.d.). CUSO, as a member of VSO international, has formulated partnerships around the world and works with local organizations in different countries to establish where help is needed the most (“CUSO-VSO”, n.d.), just as the example of Mozambique will exemplify.
As the North American member of the VSO, CUSO-VSO sends primarily Canadians and Americans on international volunteer assignments all over the world, including the Caribbean, Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The work includes different development projects, and as the number of volunteers grow, more and more awareness for this type of work is evident across Canada (“CUSO-VSO”, n.d.).
CUSO-VSO Case Study: Mozambique
An important approach to understanding the work of an NGO like CUSO, and now CUSO-VSO, is focusing on a specific development project. An interesting case study to examine is the case of CUSO in Mozambique. Frank Tester (2006) explores the issue of volunteering for change in this war-torn country following the Renamo/FRELIMO conflict in the 1990s, and the 1992 Rome Accord that followed.
This accord sought to disarm civilians and stop wartime hostilities. It is estimated that there are over 600 million small arms and light weapons (SALW) in the world today—in fact, Small arms and light weapons: A global humanitarian challenge (2001) reports that of the “49 major conflicts in the 1990s, 47 were waged with small arms as the weapons of choice. Small arms are responsible for over half a million deaths per year, including 300,000 in armed conflict and 200,000 more from homicides and suicides” (para. 1). Based on the preliminary efforts of the Christian Council of Mozambique (CCM) and the Foundation for Community Development (FCD) to remove weapons from civilians and replace them with development tools— i.e. melting down guns and armour and transforming them into tools such as ploughs and scissors, and even into art as a means of rehabilitation and transformation—CUSO joined this movement and was instrumental in the process of moving toward development and peace, in association with the Tools for Arms project (TAE) (Tester, 2006). This project was launched as a means to create a more formalized disarmament program in Mozambique and to lay a foundation for development within the country. It was launched in October1995 and carried on for the next five years, in cooperation with a variety of community groups, government agencies, and NGOs, like CUSO (Perry, 2004).
Mozambique has had a rocky past, with much internal conflict due to civil wars, invasion by other nations, the fight for independence against its colonial power from the 1960s to 1975, and the formation of the Liberation Front of Mozambique (FRELIMO), the Mozambican National Resistance, which was a guerilla army, also known as Renamo, supported by the apartheid government in South Africa. This South-East African nation, like most colonized countries, has had its share of political uprising and social change—and due to advancing technology, these conflicts have gained momentum with the presence of armed weapons. Due to continuous conflict in Mozambique—nearly 20 years of civil war—it is estimated that there are close to seven million weapons buried around the country, primarily in the fear that war would once again break out (Perry, 2004). After decades of turmoil, the conflict had settled, for the most part, in the early 1990s, and in order to maintain this intermittent peace—and avoid other conflicts—the Christian Council of Mozambique, with the help of NGOs, such as CUSO, set out to disarm the nation (Tester, 2006). Jennifer Perry (2004) claims that “disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR) programs have thus become an essential step in the internal conflict resolution processes in these affected nations” (p. 1). Tester (2006) contends that the kind and number of weapons collected through the TAE project and ultimately turned into tools and works of art dramatically illustrated how damaging the country’s conflicts had been to its citizens and its development over those years of war.
The TAE project really took off in 1997, with an experimental workshop to determine if what was envisioned for this project would be turned into reality. Upon establishing the project as possible and having potential for change, the only problem that faced the project was the scrutiny faced by artists in African countries—artists are often seen as trivial (Tester, 2006). Tester (2006) notes that this issue then took the forefront of the project:
The processes of transformation and providing civic education aimed at creating a culture of peace and reconciliation thus came to play secondary roles in the overall project. The CUSO cooperant attempted to formalize a working relationship between the artists and TAE, but quickly came up against the attitudes referred to earlier. (Tester, 2006, pp. 171-172)
The manner in which weapons were collected and subsequently disposed of is testament to the yearning this country had for development:
After weapons were collected, they were publicly destroyed immediately under appropriate conditions, depending on weapons type. Trained individuals destroyed firearms either by sawing them into pieces (for use in art or sculpture projects) or by controlled explosion. Project technicians deactivated and destroyed explosives (landmines, grenades, bazooka rockets) by exploding them. As a result, the program collected more than 61,000 different types of weapons and accessories, including 2,155 guns and gave out more than 1000 tools. (Perry, 2004, pp 11-12)
In many cases of national conflict, the horrors of death and destruction are silenced in favour of promoting the success of restructuring and development. So the millions and millions of people sacrificed in the process are often forgotten. The post-colonial legacy of many countries is telling of this, so projects like TAE are important in keeping the history and foundation of this freedom alive; instead of trying to forget and hide the conflict and war, the citizens are given a chance to examine and embrace that it occurred, so that they will fight to ensure this does not happen again (Tester, 2006). CUSO was essential in making this essential, if somewhat unusual, transition to development happen. Tester (2006) notes the successes of this project was in both moving the country forward and embracing its history—taking the weapons that decimated Mozambique and using them to create beauty:
The idea of a menacing piece of metal, designed to destroy life, being trans- formed into a form suggesting play, whimsy, irony, and humour is appealing. For example, a miniature Eiffel Tower […] is symbolic of the cultural achievements of Europe built on the exploitation of former colonies. (p. 174)
However, as promising as this project was to raise awareness of the conflicts in Mozambique, the pieces created by these artists were rarely seen in the community—“one reason given by TAE field staff was that rural people would not understand the artists’ ideas and might even mistake the sculptures for magic charms” (Tester, 2006, p. 172)
Although various disarmament programs have accomplished much success on a local level in different regions, there is a need to promote these programs on a global scale; however, societal factors tend to play a large role, which unfortunately, makes it difficult to replicate the programs more broadly (Perry, 2004). The issue is that the art, although very symbolic of issues facing the country, was not entirely helpful in developing and contributing to progress—especially for the country’s poorest. Also, the idea to spread peace and cease the conflict was more successful in constructing the project then in executing it (Tester, 2006). The construction of the project was desirable, but unfortunately, the collection, dismemberment of arms, and transformation into art is much more of a symbolic change then tangible. Tester (2006) does, however, concede that “the TAE experience suggests nonetheless that the symbolic and material roles of art in processes of peace and reconciliation are potentially considerable and that their incorporation requires careful consideration and design” (p. 177). The joint efforts of CUSO and TAE volunteers were not entirely successful in their venture, but succeeded in some aspects. By working together, both local and international volunteers were able to successful disarm much of the nation of Mozambique, and in return, started the transformation into development.
Conclusion
Volunteers working with NGOs have had a major impact on the development agenda throughout the world for many years. After the formation of CUSO in the early 1960s, and the merger of CUSO-VSO in 2008, volunteer development in Canada has been forever changed. The tremendous impact of Canadian volunteers, working in concert with colleagues in the Global South, through organizations such as CUSO has pushed Canada into the spot of one of being one of the most influential countries in development in regards to international volunteerism. Although CUSO’s work is not globally recognized in quite the same way as that of the Red Cross or UNICEF, the work it does, like the example of Mozambique, is important in small scale, community development and capacity building. CUSO’s belief is that “volunteers serve people and communities. And, just as important, they learn about the world and about themselves through the transformative act of volunteering. Collectively our history is written in the people we have sent overseas, and the people we worked with at the grassroots of change” (“2009/10 Annual Report—CUSO-VSO”, n.d., p. 15).
References
2009/10 Annual Report –CUSO-VSO. Retrieved on February 23, 2011. http://uturn.cyansolutions.com/cuso-vso/2009-2010-annual-report/english/.
Bartell, M. 2003. “Internationalization of universities: A university culture-based framework.” Higher Education, 45(1), 43-70.
CUSO-VSO. Retrieved on February 23, 2011. http://www.cuso-vso.org/.
Perry, J. (2004, July 14). Small Arms and Light Weapons Disarmament Programs: Challenges, Utility, and Lessons Learned. Retrieved on March 24, 2011. http://www.fas.org/asmp/campaigns/smallarms/SALWPaper.pdf.
Rooy, A. V. 2000. “Goods news! You may be out of a job: Reflections on the past and future 50 years for Northern NGOs.” Development in Practice, 10(3 & 4), 300-318.
Sherrard, M. S., Stringham, J., Sow, S. C., & McBride, J.S. (2006). “The forms and structure of International Voluntary Service.” Voluntas, (17), 163-180.
Small arms and light weapons: A global humanitarian challenge. Retrieved on March 24, 2011. http://www.ploughshares.ca/control/interactive/index.html
Tester, F. J. 2006. “Art and disarmament: Turning arms into ploughshares in Mozambique.” Development in Practice, 16(2), 169-178.
Trilokekar, R. D. 2010. “International education as soft power? The contributions and challenges of Canadian foreign policy to the internationalization of higher education.” Higher Education, (59), 131-147.
Volunteering for development. (2004, October). Retrieved on March 24, 2011. http://www.unv.org/en/news-resources/archive/unv-news/unv-news-october-2004/doc/volunteering-for-development.html
No comments:
Post a Comment