In 2010, the Caribbean nation of Haiti was stunned, first by a 7.0 magnitude earthquake and then by a flood of money. In the aftermath of the deadly earthquake, $13.5 billion USD flowed into the country bringing hope to the chronically impoverished nation. Many believed the money would transform the nation’s historically poor infrastructure, agriculture and economy.   

Five years later, that hope has diminished along with the promise of change. The mismanagement of 13.5 billion dollars, and a slew of ill advised development projects, turned the unprecedentedly well-funded dream of “building back better” into a nightmare.

But how did all that money fail to make a positive, long lasting change? The answer lies in how, and by whom the money was handled. Billions of dollars were not handed directly to the Haitian people. In-fact, there was little coordination between Haitians, and donor countries/aid agencies (like the UN, USAID, Red Cross, etc.) administering the money, and coming up with relief projects. With limited exceptions, nations, and nonprofits donating money sought to maintain complete control over development projects, prioritizing what they, not the Haitian people, saw as pertinent.

One of the most prolific examples of waste comes from USAID. USAID spent 1.5 billion dollars following the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti. According to Jake Johnston, who works for Center for Economic Policy and Research, less than a penny of each dollar spent went directly to Haiti. Most of that 1.5 billion spent by USAID went to covering the living expenses and salaries of international contractors flown in to work on the development and infrastructure projects.

USAID’s approach to “aid” (and that of multiple others) resembled a business more than anything else. Relying on outside instead of local when hiring contractors, architects, etc… with little understanding of the sociocultural context of the place they were working in. This method has been proven to be a waste of money, and a danger to the Haitian (or any other aid recipient country’s) economy. Hiring Haitian contractors, architects, whatever, would have been incredibly cost effective, and a great tool for job creation. Hiring local would have simultaneously stimulated a deteriorating economy, while answering the urgent needs of the people is a formula for recovery, and initiating sustainable growth. A localized approach to aid in Haiti could have avoided the overly underwhelming results 13.5 billion dollars had.

Global citizens have to make sure the failures that debilitated Haiti don’t manifest in any other nation struck by a disaster. Unfortunately, the world has an immediate opportunity to learn from its failures in Haiti while rebuilding Nepal. The recent, and completely devastating, earthquakes that have hit Nepal have garnered significant international attention. The international community has pledged millions to answer the urgent need of the Nepali people. However, as seen in Haiti, money is not enough. There needs to be a concentrated effort by donor countries, NGOs, charities, and everyone else to engage, and utilize the Nepali people, and government when making any plans for recovery and development. Otherwise, Nepal could be the next multi billion dollar disappointment.