NGOs and Listening

Footitt, Hilary; Crack, Angela M.; Tesseur, Wine

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-51776-2_1

Cited by 4 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Footitt et al. (2020) have argued, for example, that development actors (and in our case fundermediaries) listen most actively to those they are accountable to. Due to contemporary funding mechanisms and requirements, development actors often feel obliged to listen to funding agencies and donors to secure their own position and future in the development‐assistance field.…”

Section: The Inclusion Of Voices and The Politics Of Listeningmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Bassel, 2017; Couldry, 2010), specifically in the context of international development partnerships (e.g. Footitt et al., 2020). Attending to the neglected question of a politics of listening provides insight into what is missing and necessary to carve out space for alternative relationships and meaningful inclusion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bassel, 2017;Couldry, 2010), specifically in the context of international development partnerships (e.g. Footitt et al, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There was a tacit understanding among the fundermediary representatives in our study that the inclusion of the communities’ voices automatically inferred that the fundermediaries listened. In general they failed to recognize that their listening was predesigned and mediated through programmatic objectives (Footitt et al., 2020).…”

Section: The Kenyan Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research in development studies has 'Fundermediaries' and Aid-chain Partnerships in Kenya 285 illustrated how development actors' ability to listen often hinges on the broader dynamics in the aid chain. Footitt et al (2020) have argued, for example, that development actors (and in our case fundermediaries) listen most actively to those they are accountable to. Due to contemporary funding mechanisms and requirements, development actors often feel obliged to listen to funding agencies and donors to secure their own position and future in the development-assistance field.…”

Section: The Inclusion Of Voices and The Politics Of Listeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

‘Fundermediaries’ in Nairobi, Kenya: Development Partnerships in the Aid Chain

Woensdregt¹,

Nencel²

2023

Development and Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By representing the voice of communities, community‐based organizations (CBOs) are increasingly joining development partnerships. This article explores the inherently contradictory relationship between ‘voice raising’ and the politics of listening. While academia has mostly focused on the inclusion of CBOs, few studies have approached this subject from the perspective of the listening practices of ‘fundermediaries’ (a portmanteau term combining ‘funder’ and ‘intermediary’). This ethnographic research on a CBO led by male sex workers in Nairobi, Kenya, illustrates that the listening ability of fundermediaries hinges on their position in the aid chain, and specifically on the dynamics of their own accountability. The analysis distinguishes between two partnership types. The first uses a pragmatic approach, which ultimately limits the channels for CBOs to be included and heard, resulting in them having to ‘make noise’ to ensure they are heard. The second creates more possibilities to listen, engages in constructive dialogues with partner CBOs, and includes the ideas and expertise of CBOs in development strategies; hence, CBOs feel heard and are positive about these partnerships. Improved listening practices facilitate opportunities to reconfigure the position of the different actors in development partnerships and can benefit both the positions of CBOs in the aid chain and the programmatic outcomes of fundermediaries.

show abstract

Section: The Inclusion Of Voices and The Politics Of Listeningmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bassel, 2017;Couldry, 2010), specifically in the context of international development partnerships (e.g. Footitt et al, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Kenyan Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Inclusion Of Voices and The Politics Of Listeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

‘Fundermediaries’ in Nairobi, Kenya: Development Partnerships in the Aid Chain

Woensdregt¹,

Nencel²

2023

Development and Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Participatory translation and anti‐racism in NGO development work: A method of co‐producing translations with community members

Chasukwa,

Crack

2024

Development Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

MotivationThis article argues that the NGO sector should prioritize translation as an anti‐racist practice because failing to tackle colonial language hierarchies replicates historic power structures. Aligned with the locally led approach to development, the article responds to calls for more research into the role of translation in shaping development outcomes, and answers direct appeals from NGO practitioners for translation glossaries in different languages to improve communication between development actors.PurposeWe introduce a new participatory method for co‐producing translations of terms that community members deem important for their visions of “development” and social change. We contend that participatory translation fosters an anti‐racist approach to knowledge production by centring communities in the construction of meaning, which may encompass language and concepts outside the international development lexicon.Approach and methodsThe study was based on the principles of community‐based participatory research, and an Advisory Board of community members was instrumental in its design. The draft of the glossary was produced in two three‐day participatory workshops in Lilongwe and Zomba, Malawi. These were attended by 36 people representing potential user groups of the glossary.FindingsThe workshop participants created 385 translations of development terms, including 70 translations that are not listed in the Oxford Chichewa–English Dictionary. They also engaged in critically reflective discussions that challenged dominant discourses of development. We argue that participatory translation is a tool to transcend the language barrier in a way that simultaneously subverts conventional power hierarchies and offers access to different ways of understanding the world.Policy implicationsNGOs in different linguistic and geographical contexts could adopt participatory translation activities in the early stages of forming relationships with communities and local partners to build trust and common understanding. In line with an anti‐racist approach, this would help to combat systemic linguistic exclusion, which exacerbates other forms of disadvantage.

show abstract

Making Noise

Woensdregt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This ethnographic research examines the politics of knowledge within the framework of official development aid (ODA). The study focuses on a queer male sex worker-led organization (SLO) located in Nairobi, Kenya. The primary objective of this research is to explore the ways in which this organization, deeply entrenched in development partnerships within the ODA system, navigate and engage with the intricate politics of knowledge that directly impact them. It does by answering the following central question is: How do SLOs embedded in development partnerships in the ODA system participate in and negotiate the politics of knowledges that affect them? In addition to an in-depth portrayal of the research setting, introducing the organization's staff, members, activities, goals, and the socio-political context it operates within, the introduction chapter explores the theory surrounding the politics of knowledges, and extends this to the context of the ODA system and its implications. Key concepts, such as epistemic injustice and epistemicide, are introduced to illustrate the constraints on incorporating subaltern voices and perspectives within this system. The chapter links these dynamics surrounding politics of knowledges to the enduring structures of colonialism, underlining the resulting hierarchies of race and place. After discussing the methodology, five empirical chapters analyse the politics of knowledges in the ODA system from the perspective of the SLO, as well as how SLOs participate negotiate these and to what end. The empirical chapters analyse the politics of knowledges from five different epistemic relations. The build-up of chapters represents the hierarchical set-up of aid chains that CBOs are part of, and thus discusses the politics of knowledges from the top of the aid chain downwards. More specifically, each chapter explores hegemonic ways of knowing African sex workers and their organisations in a specific domain. Drawing from sex workers’ knowledge paradigms demonstrates how SLOs negotiate and respond to hegemonic ways of knowing and with what effects. The concluding chapter (chapter 8) joins together the different dimensions of the politics of knowledges discussed to show how they function together in keeping the power hierarchies inherent in development partnerships in place. It concludes that the contemporary ODA system, including hierarchies of knowledges fails to take into account certain forms of sex workers’ knowledge, causing epistemic injustice. It proposes that in order to make the politics of knowledges in the ODA system more epistemically just, there is need for methods and modes that can disrupt and explore alternatives to hegemonic accounts of sex workers, that aim at recentring knowledges from the margins that provide an alternative to neoliberal epistemes that maintain institutions and universities as centres of knowledge production, and that provide directions for doing so. While this chapter highlights the need for systemic changes and the potential reimagining of the ODA system to achieve epistemic justice, it also acknowledges that such changes may take time and may not directly benefit sex workers and other marginalized communities involved in development partnerships. Hence, it outlines the future directions policies and practices should take to ensure the inclusive participation of SLOs and CBOs in the ODA system, with less conditionalities. The Epilogue gives a concluding reflection, shedding light on the present challenges queer male sex workers in Nairobi face. It offers a tentative outlook on the future of sex work and sex worker-led organizations in Nairobi and wider Kenya while underscoring the need for alternative ways of working in the ODA system.

show abstract

NGOs and Listening

Cited by 4 publications

References 36 publications

‘Fundermediaries’ in Nairobi, Kenya: Development Partnerships in the Aid Chain

‘Fundermediaries’ in Nairobi, Kenya: Development Partnerships in the Aid Chain

Participatory translation and anti‐racism in NGO development work: A method of co‐producing translations with community members

Making Noise

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About