Thanks to ongoing conflicts, twenty million people in some of the world’s poorest countries are now at risk of famine. To respond to the pressing needs of communities in Nigeria, Somalia, South Sudan, and Yemen, international aid organisations including CARE, Oxfam, Save the Children and the International Rescue Committee have banded together to form the Global Emergency Response Coalition in the United States. The Coalition, alarmed at the lack of global attention to these multiple crises, has turned to the American public – and the private sector – for funds to carry out relief work.
Fortunately, the private sector is answering – and they may even be contributing to a new model for corporate social responsibility (CSR) that can be applied to future emergencies. The Global Emergency Response Coalition has managed to attract some critical corporate partners, and more will likely follow. They include BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, as well as PepsiCo and Visa but also tech giants Google and Twitter. The PepsiCo Foundation and BlackRock have promised to match public gifts to the Coalition, up to $1 million each.
Efficiency and Impact
On the face of it, those sums sound like a pittance compared to what the American government spends. In the current US fiscal year, Washington has already allocated over $2 billion for anti-famine efforts. Behind those numbers, though, lies a stark reality: the traditional international donor community, and especially donor governments, have a poor track record when it comes to effectively delivering resources when they are most needed. Bitter debates over American foreign aid spending have further muddied the waters as to the reliability that funding. The same President Trump that promised Pope Francis he would augment famine relief by $329 million also proposed cutting that funding by over $1 billion.
Somalis, who have endured as much deprivation as anybody, can speak to this: the last time a major famine hit, in 2011, the international community’s aid only arrived after most of the famine’s 260,000 victims had already died. This time does not appear to be different, and the UN’s funding appeal for famine relief has only managed to hit 49% of its funding goal. Those donors also tend to be distracted by other priorities, failing to see the linkages between issues like counterterrorism or security and humanitarian crises. When the UN organised a conference on Somalia in London this past May, security was the most prominent item on the agenda.
This is where the private sector has a critical role to play. This dynamic has played out in Africa before, such as at the height of the Ebola epidemic in West Africa in 2014. The World Health Organisation (WHO) wasted precious months before finally declaring a public health emergency and mobilising resources. Fortunately, private aid organisations and a few foreign companies in the afflicted countries did not wait for the WHO’s belated decision. Instead, they sprang into action on the front lines of the epidemic.
Learning from the Private Sector Ebola Response
The Ebola crisis placed the spotlight on foreign companies that were willing to brave the dangers posed by the disease and leverage their roles as local employers and investors. The Russian aluminium company UC Rusal, for example, is one of the largest foreign investors in Guinea. At the outbreak of the Ebola epidemic, many other aluminium companies in the bauxite-rich country – especially Chinese companies – left in a hurry. Rusal, however, spent $10 million building a treatment facility that took in afflicted locals and will soon host trials of a Russian Ebola vaccine. The treatment centre managed to tally an impressive treatment rate, with 62.5% of patients reportedly recovering.
Even though the outbreak is now over, the centre represents exactly the kind of healthcare infrastructure resource Guinea needs most: the Russian company is repurposing it as a diagnostics centre for future infectious disease outbreaks, including but not limited to Ebola. The hope is that centres like this one will catch outbreaks more quickly, facilitating a rapid response.
In neighbouring Liberia, Firestone offered another effective example of private sector response. When Ebola was detected in the company town of Harbel, home to a Firestone rubber plantation, Firestone built its own dedicated treatment centre. Firestone’s hospitals, clinics, and schools were repurposed to serve the surrounded communities, taking in patients and serving as quarantine quarters for patients and their families. Like UC Rusal, Firestone put its on-to-ground infrastructure and immense resources to work in order to fight the epidemic. Without the company’s active presence, it is hard to say what would have happened to those communities.
Breaking the Cycle of Crisis
Of course, neither company would have been as effective in contributing to the Ebola response effort without significant operations on the ground. In many of the areas currently at risk of famine, like northern Nigeria and Somalia, long-running conflicts make outside investment and private sector involvement difficult, if not impossible. Conflict is, in fact, what all of these places have in common: the most recent instances of famine helped push the World Bank to reclassify conflict as the primary driver of “suffering and poverty” last year. It is what the Bank calls a cycle of crisis: poor management of land and water resources and fighting over those same resources feed into each other, exacerbated by the impacts of climate change and natural phenomena like droughts.
Breaking that cycle requires a proactive, preventive approach, and this is where private companies looking to pursue CSR objectives can do the most good. Alongside its financial contributions to the new Coalition, PepsiCo has been pursuing this type of local engagement through public-private partnerships. The brand has taken part in projects to boost chickpea production (and thus overall food security) alongside the World Food Programme and USAID in Ethiopia and deliver clean water with the Inter-American Development Bank in Latin America. Of course, those efforts still can’t match its own merchandising in scale. As Akinwumi Adesina of the African Development Bank put it last month, “you can find Coca-Cola or Pepsi anywhere in rural Africa, so why can’t you find seeds?”
Standing Defiant: African Countries Respond to Trump’s Comments
Trump’s recent bout of racism has given African states the opportunity to exert considerable agency on the world stage and also take the moral high ground of dignity and respect. Though Trump’s comments are of a vulgar and vile nature, they represent nothing new: African countries are severely misunderstood and misrepresented in mindsets and media, in particular by those of some western publics.
This is to everyone’s detriment, as African countries are strategic partners in trade and security and will only grow more vital to the state of global, economic and political affairs – it is estimated that the majority of the world’s population growth will take place on the African continent.
The African Union’s Response
Trump’s comments are an opportunity for the African Union, or AU, and for individual African states to exert agency and also strengthen their moral standing. Trump’s outright racism and the ensuing African diplomatic response and the strong voices on social media represent a key moment in recognising Africa’s all too often under-appreciated importance to global affairs. The African Union condemned Trump’s comments in the strongest of terms, and issued a statement declaring that:
“The African Union Mission wishes to express its infuriation, disappointment and outrage over the unfortunate comment made by Mr. Donald Trump, President of the United States of America, which remarks dishonor the celebrated American creed and respect for diversity and human dignity.” The comments were further characterized by African envoys as “outrageous, racist, and xenophobic.”
Botswana has been a major voice in this response, describing the comments as “irresponsible, reprehensible, and racist.” Among the larger African states, Nigeria has not issued an official response, though South Africa is issuing a diplomatic protest over the comments, stressing that “relations between South Africa and the United States, and between the rest of Africa and the United States, must be based on mutual respect and understanding.” US diplomats were summoned in Ghana, Botswana, and Senegal – more African countries are expected to follow suit.
American Views on Africa
The racism and ethnocentrism inherent in labelling “distant” countries (such as Haiti and nations in Africa) pejoratively is nothing new. Though most Americans would not express their worldviews in such crass and vulgar terms, there is widespread ignorance about African countries, with little recognition that African countries represent strategic trade and security partners, not to mention their vast cultural wealth. This problem lies in all facets of American society, from predominantly negative and homogenising news coverage about the African continent to the Eurocentric focus of the education system.
These comments were made in a larger context of domestic demographic change within the US, in which white people will enter minority status by 2044, in addition to the global power shifts of the wider world. Not only are Trump’s comments steeped in racism and ignorance, but they represent the uncertainty and deep discomfort many white Americans feel in the midst of the changing domestic demographics and a world order in which the US is no longer the lone superpower.
Africa is the Future
The African continent is the future, as African population growth will account for the majority of the world’s global population with half of the world being African by 2100. African countries are already strategic partners in trade and security, and will only become stronger players in global political and economic affairs.
Though it is certainly a desired goal for public opinion – the worldviews of western publics in particular – to recognise and appreciate the importance of African countries in their right and their integral significance to international relations, in some respects it doesn’t matter what Americans might think about a massive continent of 54 countries. As John and Jean Comaroff have written in ‘Theory from the South‘, “Lagos is not catching up to us. Rather, we are the ones catching up to Lagos.” African countries are not waiting on Western publics’ enlightenment.
Due to the rise of emerging powers changing the global landscape of power relations, African countries have more opportunity than ever to exert agency in selecting their partners and leveraging relations for national gain. Though the US is a key economic partner for much of the continent, African countries have many other options and it is well known that the approach of China and other emerging powers are, in many respects, regarded more positively than traditional western approaches. Relations between the US and African countries have been marked by longstanding goodwill, but Trump’s comments may complicate relations, ranging from security cooperation to trade ties.
Most important is African ownership of African development, in which the harmonisation of external partners aligns with domestically articulated goals and aims in respect to the continent’s nations. African countries, and all of the diversity within them, must be appreciated in their own right and understood on their own terms.
African countries have their own visions and national development plans and are charting a course marked by innovation and holistic strategies aimed at meeting both human and environmental needs. It is time African countries are recognised and respected for the leaders they are on the world stage and that western publics realise that society’s global future is very much an African one.
Trump’s comments are of course vulgar and crude, but should make people think very seriously about society’s own failings in how people portray – and learn about – Africa, an incredibly diverse continent of 54 countries, from our media to our classrooms. Africa is the future, and – following Trump’s comments – African countries have taken the opportunity to exert agency on the world stage and take the moral high ground.
Gem Reports Finding Fifth-Biggest Diamond in History
One of the biggest diamonds in history has been dug up in the Kingdom of Lesotho, Southern Africa.
The diamond has been valued at 910 carats and described as of “exceptional quality”. At roughly the size of two golf balls, it is the fifth biggest diamond ever found.
The stone was found at the Lestseng Diamond Mine in north-east Lesotho, operated by Gem Diamonds Ltd. The mine is renowned for the size and quality of its stones, which have the highest average selling price in the world. It was at the Letseng mine that the 603-carat Lesotho Promise diamond was found in 2006 and sold for a reported $12.4bn in Belgium.
“This exceptional top-quality diamond is the largest to be mined to date and highlights the unsurpassed quality of the Letseng mine,” CEO Clifford Elphick said in a statement. “This is a landmark recovery for all of Gem Diamonds’ stakeholders, including our employees, shareholders and the Government of Lesotho, our partner in the Letseng mine.”
It has been categorised as a D colour Type IIa diamond, meaning it has very few or no nitrogen atoms making it a very rare, and very expensive, find. The price of a diamond is determined by the size and quality of the stones cut from it but it is estimated the stone could be worth at least $40m.
Last week, Gem reported it had found a 117-carat and 110-carat stone. In July, the company reported discoveries of two stones that exceeded 100 carats.
At the news, Gem shares bumped up 18%, trading at 93 pence by 9:06 am.
(Photo: Gem Diamonds)
Blockchain and Cryptocurrencies: The Keys to Reforming Inefficiencies in Nigeria?
Nigeria, though still a developing country, is very much a resource-rich one – and that means a lot of potential for prosperity for the nation as a whole. Through the extraction and exportation of its vast oil reserves, Nigeria could raise huge sums of money to grow and develop infrastructure to reduce poverty and improve citizens’ quality of life. However, undermining all these possibilities are inefficiencies and corruption in the public sector; problems which have persisted for the last forty years. But could modern technologies such as Blockchain and cryptocurrency provide a solution?
Corruption and Inefficiency
Corruption and inefficiency are worryingly common in African countries at varying levels of development, and Nigeria is one of the worst affected. Its main industry, oil, has been particularly crippled by inefficiency problems; non-enforcement of contract terms in 1993 led to losses of $60bn, while between 2009 and 2011 a further $11bn was lost through theft. Nigerian ports are also impacted upon by inefficiencies and corruption and consequently suffer losses of nearly $3bn annually, as well as having the generation of 10,000 jobs each year stifled. Poor infrastructure, inconsistent policy and an unclear administrative system have been listed causes of the issues.
Yet, the problems are not limited only to commerce and businesses. The public sector in Nigeria is riddled with corruption, and this extends to the citizens that government officials are meant to serve. A report by anti-corruption organisation Transparency International ranked Nigeria lowly 136th in its annual Corruption Perception Index; it has also been found that on average a Nigerian will pay a bribe once every two months according to Nigeria’s 2016 National Corruption Report, with the police and prosecutors being the most frequent recipients. Clearly, Nigeria is consistently sabotaging its own potential through administrative problems and personal greed. However, a combination of Blockchain technology and cryptocurrency could help end this cycle.
As explained in the previous article on Blockchain, the concept can be described as a decentralised peer-to-peer digital ledger in which financial records, compiled into a block, are added to a digital chain in a permanent and unchangeable way. By being decentralised, there are both security and speed improvements; security is increased by the removal of any ‘master copy’ of the ledger, while the absence of a middle-man drastically decreases the time a transaction takes to be completed. The other technology mentioned – cryptocurrencies – are digital currencies that harness the Blockchain technology in an online marketplace. But what does this have to do with preventing corruption and inefficiency? Well, in fact, there are uses of these two concepts that are very relevant here.
Firstly, smart contracts could be used to provide citizens with access to their legal entitlements. Blockgeeks state how smart contracts help ‘exchange money, property, shares, or anything of value in a transparent, conflict-free way while avoiding the services of a middleman’. In the more remote areas of Nigeria, this could prove revolutionary. It could give farmers legal rights for their land, in doing so providing them with a valuable and tradeable asset; an NGO called Bitland is already providing this service in Ghana with great success – there’s no reason why Nigeria could not engage in the same process, improving current inefficiencies in the legal sector as well as reducing inequalities.
Additionally, if citizens were to have access to their own legal profile in which their rights, assets and licences are all easily available, it could go far in reducing the prevalence of the everyday bribery that appears to go on so often. If an individual needed to obtain a new copy of a driving license, for example, they could do so using Blockchain, without the need to go through a public sector that is almost above the law and can charge illegally.
Furthermore, Blockchain technology could be used to ensure true democracy occurs. A lot of African countries remain in quasi-dictatorial states, in which a dictator operates essentially under the illusion of untampered democratic process. A Blockchain can provide a transparent, unchangeable ledger of digital votes that would ensure corruption could not occur, and therefore democracy would be protected.
While Nigeria does operate democratically, it is evident that corruption is present throughout the state infrastructure, and therefore the country would benefit from having a system that could ensure democracy exists without exploitation. This open-ledger technology, in combination with cryptocurrency, can prevent corruption outside of voting too. By providing a traceable record of every single financial transaction and through the absence of a middle-man, it could create tangible progress in the prevention of foreign aid being misappropriated, something that has been seen to occur in Nigeria.
However, for all the potential improvements that Blockchain and cryptocurrencies can provide, major obstacles still remain. There will be significant data privacy and governance considerations surrounding the transparency of these ledgers; ledgers that will be containing what is currently regarded as confidential and private information. As well as this, there has to be a willingness of the existing government to use the new technology – it obviously cannot be forced upon them.
Given that the government largely is the target of the reform that Blockchain and cryptocurrencies would enable, it appears unlikely that such technology will be welcomed with open arms. Instead, it seems that there somehow needs to be an overhaul of the attitudes within the Nigerian public sector, so that it is more willing to find solutions to the crippling problems that have persisted for so long.
More on CSR
The Key to Fighting Short-Termism: Maximising Stakeholder Value
“Shareholder value is the dumbest idea in the world… shareholder value is a result, not a strategy… Your main...
Social Business: An Examination
Social Business. A marriage of words that produces a concept we see increasingly tossed around – yet by very definition,...
Why Purpose in Business Is Not About Doing the Right Thing
At a recent event on the concepts of corporate purpose and social responsibility, senior leaders of several large businesses were...
Cryptocurrencies3 days ago
Ripple and MoneyGram: A Proof of Concept for the Use of XRP?
Cryptocurrencies2 days ago
XRP, NEO, Monero, IOTA: Can One of the New Kids on the Block Dislodge Bitcoin?
Cryptocurrencies4 days ago
Cryptocurrencies: The Next Dot-Com Bubble?
Europe1 day ago
Silvio Berlusconi: Why Italy and Europe May Need Him
Cryptocurrencies2 days ago
ICOs: The New Gold Rush
Cryptocurrencies2 days ago
Bitcoin Bubble: Cryptocurrency Values are Plunging
Americas3 days ago
US Healthcare: Income Disparity and the ‘$1trn Toll’
Cryptocurrencies3 days ago
Blockchain: Could It Improve the Quality of Financial Reporting?