Response to Discussion Question
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) states that in many cases, private-sector organizations and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO's) are responsible for operating and maintaining elements of Nation's critical infrastructure (Hoog, 2011). The effectiveness of NGO disaster relief efforts has in many ways affected the independent functioning of developing, and in many cases even developed, nation states. More and more governments across the world are becoming reliant private sectors entities for emergency response. This has taken the onus of response away from governments as they begin to rely more and more on private entities. Those who have the money have begun to "contract out" emergency services while poorer nation aren't trusted by the international community to manage their own response (2011). Corruption in developing government systems force NGO's to bear the brunt of relief and response efforts. For example, in the 1970's, the Bangladeshi government stopped receiving aid from international donors after external sources observed widespread corruption and misuse of relief aid (Paul, 2003). These same sources concluded that external NGO's were more effective at dispersing aid and relief than the Bangladeshi government (2003). Rather than donating to government services, donors went direct to external NGO's who properly managed resources and were more impartial in their distribution. Though this was necessary at the time, the argument could be made that it impeded Bangladeshi efforts to fix the corruption from within and manage their own emergency response. Rather than putting international pressure on Bangladesh to fix the problem, NGO's solved the problem for them. Establishing NGO response as the norm takes away the government responsibility to manage their own crisis.
Economic status of a country, whether intended or not, puts international pressure on them to be responsible for aid. Because it has become the norm, as seen in the case study mentioned above, richer countries are expected to provide aid to more poorer countries. However, they are also expected to donate to allies. For example, from 2010 to 2015 the United States donated approximately $13 billion to Haiti in relief funds. From 2011 to 2014, $730 million dollars was donated to Japan from the United States for relief from the Fukushima nuclear disaster (Japan Center for International Exchange, 2014). Haiti is a poor developing country while Japan is considered a wealthy economy. In both case, the United States donated money, but obligated more towards Haiti. This shows a prioritization to support developing countries while merely assisting (a show of support) more wealthy developed ones. In many aspects, this is necessary. Allies donate to one another to show support for the other country, while donations to developing nations are more critical as they help stabilize the government and keep it operational.
References
Hoog, R. (2011). Public and private sector relationships in emergency management. Retrieved from https://www.drj.com/articles/online-exclusive/public-and-private-sector-relationships-in-emergency-management.html
Japan Center for International Exchange. (2014). US Giving for Japan Disaster Reaches $730 Million. Retrieved from https://2011disaster.jcie.org/philanthropy/usgiving-2014/
Paul, B. K. (2003). Relief assistance to 1998 flood victims: A comparison of the performance of the government and NGOs. The Geographical Journal, 169, 75-89. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/docview/231416620?accountid=14872
USAID.gov. (2016). 2010-2015 U.S. assistance to haiti overview (2015). Retrieved from https://www.usaid.gov/news-information/fact-sheets/us-assistance-haiti-overview-2010-2015-december-2014