By Nancy Kim, American University

The inaugural Changing Aid Conference, hosted by the Changing Aid Signature Research Initiative (SRI) at the School of International Service at American University, brought together scholars and practitioners in the field. The three panels were 1) Aid and Conflict, 2) Aid and Migration, and 3) Careers in Aid. There have been large shifts in who gives, how much, where, and in which manner. As demonstrated in Figure 1, official development assistance (ODA) has been on an upward trend since the 1960s. Although this might seem “positive” for the aid industry and those in need of aid, there is a need to critique this trend as the definition of ODA changes constantly. For example, ODA has expanded to include the money spent within donor countries to host and house refugees where the same amount might not stretch as far due to higher cost of living.

Figure 1. Net official development assistance and official aid received (current US$)

Within this context, highlighted by Panel 1, Panel 2 delved into the nexus between aid, especially ODA, humanitarian aid, and migration. The second panel on Aid and Migration was moderated by Dr. Ernesto Castañeda, Director of the Immigration Lab and the Center for Latin American and Latino Studies and a faculty of SRI. Panelists were from diverse backgrounds including academia, funding entities, policy research organizations, and direct service providers (Lauren Carruth, American University; Ian Proctor, Catholic Relief Services; Tazreena Sajjad, American University; Yael Schacher, Refugees International; Daniela Villacres, USAID)^[1].

From left to right: Ernesto Castañeda, Lauren Carruth, Ian Proctor, Tazreena Sajjad, Yael Schacher, Daniela Villacres

            The panelists focused on the perception and work around aid, development, and migration. To start, Dr. Schacher explained the shift that led to an explicit link between aid and migration: “During the Cold War era, aid was used to win the hearts of people. Now, aid is used to deter migration.” In the earlier days of international aid, it was seen as a way to elevate the view of the global north and to fight against communist ideologies. More and more, however, aid, especially development aid, is considered by donor countries as a way to deter migration from the global south despite evidence showing that development can lead to increased mobility.

Such aid practices based on the belief that aid will deter migration can harm the wellbeing and best-interest of the migrants themselves. Dr. Carruth shared her experience working in the Horn of Africa and brought up the question of the work of many migration and humanitarian aid organizations. In particular, she critiqued the notion of “voluntary return” where migrants fleeing devastating situations through the desert find themselves at help centers or refugee camps coerced to consent to return to where they came from to receive much-needed treatment or food and water. In such a case, aid actors were directly inhibiting the ability of migrants to move even when their lives depended on leaving their place of origin.

Dr. Sajjad also critiqued the basis of aid with regards to deterring migration. Most often aid is seen as something done “over there”, and increasingly, refugee and asylum assistance in the global north is undermined and even externalized as seen in the case of Australia offshoring refugees to the island of Nauru. Mr. Proctor built upon this theme of mobility and said, “What we need is a program, a way for someone to survive and flourish where they want to. If that means the end of the asylum system as we know it, that’s ok.” The panelists reacted to this, emphasizing that the legal figures of the asylum and the refugee cannot provide legal relief to everybody; broader categories and programs of sanctioned migration are needed to include migration due to mixed motives including climate change. But indeed, the goal is to increase protection of people on the move and to save lives.

In closing, Dr. Sajjad asked the audience to consider who is given the right to move. The movement of humanitarian and development aid professionals is seen as acceptable and even necessary while the same right to move is denied to the very people whose lives are supposed to be improved by aid.

* Nancy Kim is a doctoral student in the School of international Service at American University, researcher with Changing Aid and Project Coordinator at the Immigration Lab.

^[1] The views expressed during the panel belong to each panelist as individuals and may not reflect the views and/or opinion of the entity where they work.