Different systems

I’ve been noticing I have different expectations for how things “should” work in Malawi than I would at home. Two particular examples come to mind.

Water

In Canada, I would fully support access to clean and safe drinking water as a human right which should be guaranteed by the government and paid through public funding. The current model, which I understand to be government subsidized water, is also acceptable, and – with some important exceptions (such as access to safe water in northern communities and commercialization of water from the Great Lakes) – seems to be functioning fairly well. Most people in Canada have access to safe drinking water, and enough extra to do things like water the lawn, fill swimming pools, and irrigate strawberry fields.

In Malawi, if I were designing a system of water access from a blank slate (I’m not – ask Duncan), I would likely try for a commercial model. There is a lot of role confusion in rural Malawi around who is responsible for paying for which parts of water access – pumps are usually built by donors, and people bring their own buckets. But the question of who pays for repairs is often confusing for communities – most pumps are technically the responsibility of communities under a “community ownership” model where a committee in each village is trained to do basic repairs of their pump and collect funds to pay for these repairs. Sometimes though, NGOs, government, or politicians will show up to do repairs, which clouds expectations about who is responsible for what.

There are a few arrangements in Malawi where people are expected to pay on a per-bucket basis for water access. Someone is paid to stay near the waterpoint and collect 2-4K (less than $0.05) per bucket that is filled there. In these cases, a portion of the revenues are used to maintain and repair the waterpoint, and the rest is profit – the waterpoint is operated as a business. The business owner is then responsible for repairs – and, in fact, looses business if his waterpoint is broken. From what I have heard, this seems to be a more successful model, with fewer breakdowns lasting less time — meaning people have better access to safe water.

Political advocacy

Canada is far from perfect. But again allowing a few notable exceptions (such as proportional representation, environmental regulations, and some pretty sketchy international issues around aid, trade, and immigration), I generally believe that Canadian democracy is doing alright. Our democracy is supported by well-established and respected advocacy organizations, a strong public service, and a range of media. These institutions present decision-makers with thorough evidence, articulate public opinions, and diverse viewpoints and options. Given this, when I disagree with the direction of government, my first choice of action is to open a civil and rational discussion.

The recent protests in Malawi (which you might not have heard about) provided the opportunity for some interesting discussions around the house. My neighbour, a man of about 60, was sad to hear about violence and looting, but felt that protesting was the right course of action and the only way to have a message heard. On the other hand, my 21-year-old host brother felt that the protesters should have first opened dialogue and attended the President’s public lecture to voice their concerns. (I don’t have enough information to say whether this is typical, but I will point out that it is backwards from the trend (at least in the West) of radical youth and conservative seniors.) My own opinion was closer to that of my neighbour, that the protests were likely necessary to begin any future dialogue – where in Canada I would have expected protests to shut down dialogue more than open it.

Why the difference of opinion?

The best answer I’ve come up with so far is that I have considerably more faith in institutions in Canada to be able to achieve important results. In the examples above, these institutions would be tax systems, open media, public servants, and advocacy groups. In Malawi, I don’t see those institutions as being sufficiently established (yet) to achieve the outcomes I believe are required. To fill the gap, I think alternative methods are required, and see self-interested business models and attention-seeking public outcries as some of the reasonable alternatives.

(This post is about my current individual opinions. It should not be taken to represent the views of any organization, and I hold the option to change my mind at any point in time.)