One Street News

February-March 2013

Vol. 6, Issue 2

1. Defying Poverty with Bicycles for U.S. & Europe, too
2. Resources – iCan Shine
3. Hot Topics – Can Charity Be a Bad Thing? 

Defying Poverty with Bicycles for U.S. & Europe, too

The release of our new book Defying Poverty with Bicycles caused lots of buzz, but also many misconceptions. It centers on a social business model that guides readers through simple steps for providing appropriate bicycles to disadvantaged people in their communities, no matter where they live in the world. It also outlines proven methods for helping people launch new careers through bicycles whether as mechanics, bike shop owners or creating machines powered by bike.

Yet many readers of the announcement took offense. Some believed the book promotes volunteer-led bicycle programs while others were sure it disparages them. The book is not about volunteer-led programs, but neither does it disparage them. Instead it offers a totally different model. Still others, including reporters who wrote articles about the launch, set the book out as only representing Africa as if Africa is the only place where poverty exists.

“At first I was really excited to see all the buzz about the book,” said Sue Knaup, the author. “I thought people were connecting with this new type of program and welcoming it. But then I realized that most of the response was either offended or misguided.”

In fact, the book lays out a whole new model for self-sustaining bicycle programs in the social enterprise realm. Read the rest of the press release here.

Resources – iCan Shine

Have you ever wondered how to engage disabled people in your bicycle programs? We recently discovered iCan Shine, an organization that specializes in exactly that. They also offer training for other activities including swimming, but bicycle programs are their specialty. Take a look. They do impressive work.

Hot Topics – Can Charity Be a Bad Thing?

By: Sue Knaup, Executive Director

Charity seems so simple. We discover someone in need and reach out with whatever we have to help them. How could this be a bad thing?

But charity is no longer simple, nor is it confined to individuals helping other individuals. As we expand our view from the neighborhood level and try to grasp the struggles of people all over the world, organizations must be formed to carry through our intentions. One Street exists to help leaders of organizations with the work they have chosen to do, as long as that work includes bicycles. My concern for this hot topic also reaches farther back to when I worked for nonprofits in the animal rights, environmental and special populations movements. My work with organizations has led me to ponder a mutated form of charity.

It first caught my attention many years ago through the disturbing tendency of large nonprofits to steal credit for the work that smaller organizations had actually done. With such massive infrastructures to feed, these organizations are desperate to prove their impact in order to secure more money from funders. Their administration and payroll consumes the vast majority of their time and resources, so they isolate themselves from their community and snatch the work of others to include in their proposals and reports. They distort the level of need, seeking only the most desperate victims and presenting them as representatives of the entire community where they want to work. Then they brandish their expensive cars, offices and equipment behind security fences that shut out the local people who could have taken part in the solutions. I’ve seen this behavior for so long, I suppose I grew numb to it.

Then I noticed a disturbing link back to these gluttonous giants: organizations of a healthy size with everything going for them—a vibrant mission, lots of folks eager to help, programs with real impact—who begin to mimic the behavior of the desperate giants. They start using exclusive jargon that alienates people in their communities. They scramble to communities outside their mission and claim credit for the work of organizations there. They beseech funders who won’t give them the time of day. At first I thought this behavior was an anomaly, but I encounter it regularly now. I respond to these situations like brushfires as I try to guide the leaders back to doing their own work at an appropriate scale.

Just recently I have noticed yet another link back to the bad behavior of the giants: new nonprofits that were founded only to win charity funding. The founders have absolutely no interest in the causes they supposedly support. They only want access to the flood of funding pouring into charity efforts. I used to dismiss such organizations as scams. Alas, I’m finding there’s often more to the story. The founders may have originally had good intentions, but the deluge of charity grandstanding pulled them away from creating a healthy organization that would have stood on its own merits. Instead they fabricated it into a fantasy form built on the vapors of charity funding promises. I’ve encountered such organizations in both the developed and developing parts of our world. Any organization that sets aside its original purpose in order to go after funding is guilty.

This past month I read two books that confirmed my suspicions, but have only heightened my concern. If you have ever questioned a charity effort and want to learn some very disturbing details, first read Dead Aid. The author, Dambisa Moyo, is a highly educated economist from Zambia. She reveals the dysfunction of international aid programs and does so in a professional, objective manner. You will be disturbed enough. If you are still hungering for more gory details, move on to The Crisis Caravan by Linda Polman. She is a journalist from the Netherlands who lays out countless abominations caused by charity nonprofits. Can you imagine warring factions amputating the limbs of their civilians in order to attract charity funding? This and many other horrific images will snap into focus if you read her book.

Neither of these books offers realistic solutions. At least Dead Aid includes suggestions for high-level adjustments within world economies. But there is no mention in either book about what to do with all of this out-of-control charity mayhem. Now I know without a doubt that charity does cause enormous harm. Yet its source is that simple charity seed that lies in all of our hearts, so I’m not convinced that charity itself is a bad thing.

Unfortunately we also have brains that lead us into supposedly logical behaviors. Sure we were founded to make our city bikeable, but look at all the health funding we could get if we promise to open a clinic instead. Of course we should all stampede to the sight of a natural disaster and then fight over funding. So what if warlords steal charity funding or use it as a game piece against their opponent. If we can feed just one person, all of this will be worth it. Or perhaps our brains aren’t working hard enough...

The next piece of this puzzle I’ll be pondering is how to shift all this misused energy back onto a path that aligns with our charitable intentions: to help our neighbor without causing harm to others. I hope that One Street can escort a few misguided bicycle organizations back onto such a path and in so doing we’ll discover effective steps that may be replicable elsewhere. If many more people do the same, we might just redirect this charity stampede back into a beneficial direction.

If any of you have ideas to offer on this hot topic or would like to discuss it further, please don’t hesitate to contact me: sue{at}onestreet.org or +1-928-541-9841, Skype: sueknaup.