The comparison of cross-border diasporic and non-diasporic philanthropist’ perspectives on the global south through a visual analysis

• In Event: Views on "Development" Dynamics

Abstract

Cross-border philanthropy can be done by diaspora and non-diaspora (“Western”) philanthropists. In this study, we compare the images that diasporas have of their homelands (i.e., “country of origin”) and how these are similar with the images that Western philanthropists have of these countries when visiting them abroad.
These images are linked to the objectives that diaspora and non-diaspora have in their philanthropy. Although diaspora do sometimes experience deeply rooted racism and polarization in the country of residence (May, 2019), it is also important to focus on the European/Western aspects of their identities when studying their philanthropy. This can help to compare diaspora and non-diaspora philanthropists. Drawing on the theoretical framework developed by Said (1978), this study investigates the images of the homeland and therefore the objectives of diaspora philanthropy in the homeland. This study argues whether this image is in line with reality or, as argued by Said, whether it is more in line with a post-colonial view of the Orient (MENA) (1978). This study argues that cross-border diasporic philanthropists who are active in the homeland can have three types of objectives: (1) change-ism, (2) conservativism and (3) romanticism. Empirically, there appears to be little difference between such diasporic objectives and the objectives held by non-diasporic, (post-) colonial NGOs (historically, as well as currently). Results of this comparison demonstrate that cross-border diasporic philanthropists may have comparable difficulties avoiding post-colonialism and ‘white saviourism’ when performing philanthropy in the homeland.
This study applies a qualitative comparative approach using the phenomenological method using 40 interviews. In applying this method, “an approach to research was utilized which seeks to describe the essence of a phenomenon by exploring it from the perspective of those who have experienced it” (Teherani et al. 2015, p. 669). This was because, “in the hermeneutic approach to phenomenology, theories can help to focus inquiry, to make decisions about research participants, and the way research questions can be addressed” (Lopez and Willis 2004, p. 726). Against the background of Said’s theory on orientalism and “white saviorism” (and its criteria) (1978), the interviews were coded and analysed. The codes were based on the motivations and views described in Said’s theory and similarities among the participants and their philanthropic objectives.

References

Lopez, K. A., and Willis, D. G. (2004). Descriptive versus interpretive phenomenology: Their contributions to nursing knowledge. Qualitative health research, 14(5), pp. 726-735.
May, S. (2019). “The Best of Deeds": The Practice of Zakat in the UK. Journal of Church and State, 61(2), pp. 200-221.
Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Pantheon Books.
Teherani, A., Martimianakis, T., Stenfors-Hayes, T., Wadhwa, A., and Varpio, L. (2015). Choosing a qualitative research approach. Journal of graduate medical education, 7(4), pp.669-670.

Authors

• Malika Ouacha, Rotterdam School of Management

• Lucas Meijs, Erasmus University Rotterdam

• Kees Biekart, International Institute of Social Studies (ISS) / Erasmus University Rotterdam (EUR)