This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: ""

Does the governments should impulse the work of NGOs for a better development?

  1. Naty Lara profile image60
    Naty Laraposted 8 months ago

    Does the governments should impulse the work of NGOs for a better development?

    The increase of population has made the work of governments harder. The resources became scare and the public administration deals with new obstacles that had never face before. NGOs have been working on making proposals for the governments in order to avoid and fix public problems. Nevertheless, most of the administrations prefer to delegate the policy making to private enterprises than NGOs.
    The common believe is that private enterprises lose the public orientation of polices and this is not the case of the NGOs. But, what are your opinions about it?

  2. tamarawilhite profile image90
    tamarawilhiteposted 8 months ago

    Nonprofits, non-governmental organizations, can be as bureaucratic and wasteful as governments and sometimes less effective than private business.
    We should not simply assume NGOs are better than corporations, and NGOs are by definition driven by a set of goals that may or may not be in the interests of the local population. For example, NGOs that let people starve and scared them into rejecting food aid from the United States by lying that genetically modified food that Americans are regularly eating was toxic. They let people die because of their politics. Millions of children went blind and a large number died because Golden Rice was delayed; Western NGOs going "ooh, yuck, that's unnatural" tried to prevent it being grown and distributed. That the poorest children in the world faced disability and death was irrelevant to them and their sensibilities to say we should all eat all natural food that the poorest cannot afford. And no, they didn't distribute alternative foods or vitamins, either.
    Or the NGOs that advocate buying up land and prohibiting human use of it, even in the United States. That local people cannot hunt, gather, ranch, sometimes log or even hike there - hurting the local economy and causing them to sink into poverty is irrelevant to them. The environmentalist NGOs don't care about people and actually act against their needs, because Mother Earth is more important.