McLeod Group blog, January 27, 2020
Ten years ago this month, a massive earthquake struck Haiti, devastating the capital Port-au-Prince and other cities such as Léogâne and Jacmel. About 230,000 people were killed, with many more injured and tens of thousands of homes and small businesses destroyed. Over one million people were left homeless. For the poorest country in the Western hemisphere, already struggling to recover from hurricanes in 2008 and 2009, the earthquake dealt a shattering blow.
The international response was quick and massive. Canada mobilized to deliver one of the largest humanitarian operations in our history. The immediate response, from government, NGOs and individual Canadians, amounted to more than $200 million. In subsequent months, the total rose to over $500 million.
It is time, however, to assess Canada’s actions in Haiti since January 12, 2010, and reflect on what was done and what could have been done to help the country move from relief to recovery to development. Canada needs to broaden and deepen its engagement with Haiti, taking into consideration the ongoing political turbulence and the need for effective development assistance.
Canada and other donor countries channelled much of their humanitarian assistance through United Nations agencies and large NGOs, such as CARE and CECI. The Canadian government also mobilized an unprecedented number of armed forces personnel and amount of equipment. It provided much of the aid, however, as charity/relief to the affected populations, without much – if any – thought to support for Haitians’ own recovery efforts. In January 2013, Canada’s Minister of International Cooperation Julian Fantino came close to freezing aid to Haiti, scolding the authorities for the “weaknesses in their governing institutions”.
Given Haiti’s vulnerability to natural disasters, helping the government and civil society to invest in building resilience and “building back better” would have been appropriate. There has been very little if any evidence that any of Haiti’s international partners, and the country’s ruling class, considered this objective. In fact, recent reports suggest that the country is worse off now than 10 years ago, with 3.7 million people experiencing emergency levels of food insecurity in November 2019, out of a total population of 11 million. In fact, international interest in Haiti seems to be waning, judging by the low response rate (29%) to the United Nations’ humanitarian appeal for 2019.
Haiti is not an easy country partner to work with. Social institutions are very weak, and the last decade has been marked by high levels of political and social instability. From 2004 to 2017, the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH) had a significant presence in the country, with emphasis on policing and law and order. It also left a legacy of cholera, sexual abuse and fatherless children. For the last two years, President Jovenel Moïse and the opposition have been at loggerheads, which has caused political paralysis, higher-than-usual levels of political violence, and economic disruption. Haitian political leaders have ignored calls by CARICOM, the regional grouping of countries, for dialogue.
Canada is one of the largest donors to the country and Haiti is one of the largest recipients of Canadian development assistance. What more could Canada have done to help reduce vulnerability and contribute to stability and poverty reduction?
In 2017-2018, Canada supported a number of projects, in education, health, police training, agricultural mini-credit, and assistance to internally displaced persons along the border with the Dominican Republic. The webpage information on these areas of activity notes for each one the number/percentage of women involved and/or benefiting, so steps are being taken to monitor their gender impact. Tellingly, the list of projects does not mention any Haitian partner organizations.
Without capable local institutions, it is difficult to imagine Haiti breaking out of its pattern of political stalemate, endemic poverty and dependence on foreign assistance. Bypassing these institutions perpetuates their ineffectiveness and works against sustainable development, no matter how well-intentioned and carefully planned the Canadian aid projects are. While it is evident that the development environment in Haiti is complex and messy, fraught with risk, Canada could help to mobilize Haitian efforts and resources by focussing attention at the local level in communities.
A 2015 external evaluation of Canada-Haiti development cooperation for the period 2006-2013 noted that development progress had been “hindered by a lack of national capacity and leadership”. While some projects “helped to strengthen government institutions… the almost exclusive reliance on executing agencies (the United Nations, the private sector, universities, NGOs and so on) meant the opportunity to strengthen government systems was missed”. Five years later, this observation still seems to apply.
Canada could play a useful role in supporting a platform for dialogue among the Haitian political actors by committing to a long-term engagement and help players find common ground, working with CARICOM and its member states. Greater political stability would facilitate equity-oriented reforms supported by development assistance programming.
In parallel, Canada could reconfigure its aid to Haiti to emphasize the institution and capacity building of government and civil society partners. Such assistance is especially needed in education and health, where the outcomes for women and children would be most significant.
Canada’s relationship with Haiti has suffered for a long time from a lack of critical review. It’s time to change this and support local institutions and civil society actors’ efforts to reconstruct their country.