Purchase with… Prudence
If you haven’t been in on the latest trends in charity PR moves of the last 5 years, you may have missed out on “Product (Red)” and other similar concepts. (Red) products are an attempt to get our consumer-driven society to aid impoverished nations without actually having to sacrifice our consumeristic lifestyle. The basic premise is “buy a trendy looking Product (Red) item and a percentage of the profit goes to fund humanitarian charities”. The idea has actually been around for awhile, but with Bono’s support it’s now a full-blown American fad and everyone from Starbucks to Apple have their version products they market to “help the poor”. Frankly, I’ve always found (Red) and similar campaigns a bit ironic and somewhat frustrating, for many reasons. Four of these reasons are worth passing on:
Firstly, if your actual goal is to help impoverished communities and be a global citizen, then just donate 100% of the $20, $40, or $200 bucks you were going to spend on [yet another] shirt, shoes, ipod, or whatever, instead of buying the product and only having 5% of your money go to helping the poor.
Second, part of the reason poor countries are poor is because we are a gross-consumer nation. I know you hear so many statistics that they go in one ear and out the other but let’s reflect momentarily on just one: together with all the 1st world nations (which total 25% of the world’s population) we consume 85% of the world’s resources (Americans make up 25% of that). Did you catch that?! 75% of the world’s population lives off of 15% of the planet’s resources! IS IT ANY WONDER THEY ARE POOR! So lets think our aid strategy through logically: our over-consumption exacerbates global poverty and our answer to poverty is to design programs that motivate us to consume even more so that we can feel good about a small percentage being donated to humanitarian charities. Oh yeah, that makes so much sense. Lets take that concept one step further. Most of the time the products purchased are actually manufactured in those 3rd world countries from local resources. So basically, they make a shirt at 15 cents an hour, which is then exported to you to purchase for $80 bucks so that $2 can be donated back to them so they can what… afford to buy clothes for their family and put food on the table? Nice.
Third point, and this is really the one that inspired this post, Product (Red) and other similar consumer products are typically manufactured in… wait for it… yes, China. CHINA! There is extreme irony in the fact that we’ve labeled these products (Red). I was in a local store here in town that sells products by a non-profit, which shall remain un-named, but one that has been gaining recognition in recent years for it’s work in Sudan. Now they may be a perfectly wonderful organization, I don’t know, but I was fairly disgusted when I flipped over the tags of the various clothing items they were selling to discover that they were all made in China. Here’s why: I’m sure all of you have seen the various calls for boycotts against the Beijing Olympics in an effort to pressure China into stopping its indirect aid of the Sudanese genocide. China over the last number of years has been, by far, the largest arms dealer to the Sudanese government (95% of small arms), and has been one of the major forces for stalling and watering down UN peace efforts in Darfur. Tell me, what exactly is the logic in marketing products to aid Sudan when they are manufactured in China!? I mean, you might as well put a label on the product that says “5% of your your purchase went to aid starving orphans in Sudan – 50% of your purchase went to China to fund the Sudanese genocide.”
Finally, point four – so you buy a product and the money goes to do something – do you actually know how your money was invested and whether or not the programs you are supporting are actually accomplishing something effective in fighting poverty? There are a lot of non-profits out there, but sadly, a large percentage of them don’t actually affect positive change. Some of them actually create dependency and exacerbate poverty through unsustainable solutions and projects that dehumanize the poor. I couldn’t be more serious. Before you hire someone to fix your car you research a reputable mechanic right? Poverty alleviation is a heck of a lot more complicated than the inside of your Honda Accord, but how many people actually take time to find out who is really effective in implementing international development programs? Please don’t tell me you just immediately believe the propaganda that’s on their website.
We as Americans need to start becoming serious about actually helping developing countries and we need to start becoming smart about the ways we do it. The reason this whole process infuriates me is because we have so many good people who are motivated to do something positive in the world that decide, but their actions are directed by media and campaigns to take action by purchasing something. And because they think they’ve done something to help they world they move on. But the action taken doesn’t necessarily effect positive change. Either its effects are marginal (like in point #1) or actually contributes to the original problem (like points #2 & #3) or it causes it’s own new problems (like point #4). But they’ve moved on with a feel-good notion that the world is now a better place. The question is, ‘who’s fault is it’? Is it the organization’s fault for creating a lousy aid strategy or is it the consumer’s fault for not taking the time to understand how to really impact people in a positive way? I hope you think it’s both.
And please read me loud and clear, I’m not against profits from sales going to help poor people. I bought a nalgene (USA made) just the other day that went to support a cause instead of buying one at REI. I have a Starbucks (Red) gift card I use to buy coffee – every little bit helps. What I take issue with is the fact that:
- we’ve marketed consumerism as a substitute method for an individual to be involved in the global fight against poverty and
- that the vast majority of products sold for this purpose are actually in of themselves contributors to poverty and oppression.
So, the next time you pick up a bottle of Ethos Water or try on a Product (Red) ask yourself why you’re doing it. If it’s because you actually need the item then awesome – support the cause (provided it isn’t made in China)! But if it’s because you want to help poor people in Africa or wherever, then do those people a favor and don’t; instead reduce your resource consumption and take the money you save and send it to an organization that has a reputation for implementing positive change in impoverished communities. That’s how real change begins.
Interestingly, American companies are now careful about saying their stuff isn’t made in sweat-shops, but honestly, third world factories are nothing to be proud of – rural families are torn apart as young girls leave home at age 15 to live in a slum in the city and every morning they are packed in like cows in large flat-bed trucks to work 12 hour days in hot factories for 15 to 50 cents an hour (average monthly wage of a garment factory worker in Cambodia is $63). Your Target jeans and Wal-Mart t-shirt are part of that great cycle of consumer goods. Don’t ask me how you get around that – I wear them too b/c it’s hard to find clothing that’s actually made in the USA. To me what is important is understanding that buying a product to help someone when the product itself is part of the problem is like…
it’s like wanting to do something to save the spotted owl so you trust some charity who’s marketing stationary products and 5% of the profits go to a spotted owl conservation organization – but what you don’t realize is that the stationary was made from paper pulp cut from forest trees the spotted owl was living in, and beyond that, the conservation group the profits supported didn’t actually have expertise in conservation and so their owl relocation efforts ended up with 80% of the relocated birds dying. But you walked away feeling good about your new stationary purchase and all the owls you were helping.
It’s one thing to buy something made in China or Thailand and be frustrated that there aren’t any options and look for ways to get around the problem. It’s another thing to just buy something without even thinking about the real global impacts of your actions.
And I have to acknowledge my own hypocrisy in this – I’m certainly guilty about not assessing the ramifications of my actions – on many levels. Just ask my wife. But I’m working on it.