Description
International aid is increasingly the domain of professionals, particularly among large international nongovernmental organizations (INGOs). For practitioners and academics alike, amateur aid is, at best, considered outdated (and largely ignored) and, at worst, blamed for high-profile failings in humanitarian response. Despite these perceptions, strong countervailing trends exist. In the United States, amateur, private, and voluntary development aid is on the rise with 10,000 grassroots INGOs (GINGOs) established since the early 1990s. This phenomenon remains largely unexplored in academic research. We ask: What is the place for amateur activism in a professionalizing field? To what extent do GINGOs conform with or challenge professional norms in international aid? We draw on two sources of evidence: a “large n” comparative website analysis of 60 GINGOs active in Haiti and 8 large, professional INGOs and a “small n” critical discourse analysis of select homepages. Websites, combining images and messages, signal organizational values and operations while also shaping public perceptions of the developing world. Our research finds that despite expected differences in sophistication and financial accountability, small and large organizations alike converge in their narration of beneficiaries, with the “needs-based” approach prioritized over “rights.” We explore the troubling implications of these findings for beneficiary empowerment.
