Hispanic Remittances: More than Just Philanthropy
posted on: Thursday, March 09, 2006
From the latest NonProfit Times:
“In 2004, foundations in the United States gave approximately $32 billion… That same year, Hispanics living in the United States sent more than $40 billion in remittances to support family and friends in their countries of origin.
“’Now that’s philanthropy, by any standard,’ said Orosz [Joel Orosz, professor of philanthropic studies at the Johnson Center at Grand Valley State University]. We don’t understand what’s making it tick, and exactly where those dollars are going and what it’s achieving in other countries. And that’s a hugely important issue that we’ve got to figure out and understand and give people credit for.”
Looks like Orosz needs a lesson in human labor as export, and how this philanthropy “ticks.” The issue of remittances, and contextualizing it in any dialogue of philanthropy, is problematic in many ways. Immigrants who remit do not see their actions as philanthropy; rather this money goes from family to family, for basic necessities like food, clothing, shelter, and education. In the Philippines for example, where a rough estimate of remittances ten years ago reached $6 billion (USD), remittances hardly find its way into NGOs or charities, and is quickly spent on basic day to day necessities of families.
Basically, the money is “achieving” a decent standard of living for families in countries, in South America and Asia, and other places, that are steeped in political unrest, economic instability, high rates of poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, and poor if not failing health and educational systems.
In other words, this generous $40 billion figure coming from the fastest growing minority population, is not a blanket indication of affluence much less knowledge of philanthropy or the charitable sector. On the other hand, this $40 billion is probably a low figure if you take into account the remittances not officially counted, such as those remitted by undocumenteds.
Philanthropic experts, such as Mr. Orosz, when looking at these figures, need to take a step back, and realize that this kind of giving does not come out of the kindness and generosity of affluent hearts. They partially come from the back-broken, overworked, underpaid, perhaps even most likely undocumented or trafficked. This kind of giving comes from the fields of Delano, California, the canneries of Alaska, the sweatshops in Chinatowns. And yet they still give billions of dollars to family members back home, because they know that living standards are even worse there.
These communities have much to overcome before even beginning to think about their “charitable giving” and its achievements and impact. The very communities in the U.S. from which the $40 billion to Hispanic countries and the $6 billion to the Philippines come are communities which lack the very basics of social services—affordable housing, language access, health care, educational opportunities, etc.
Considering that in 2003 the nation’s largest foundations only allocated 0.9 percent of their grant dollars to immigrant populations in the U.S., Mr. Orosz should be more concerned about how and why U.S. philanthropy fails to serve these populations, rather than trying to understand the hows and whys of their own giving.
“In 2004, foundations in the United States gave approximately $32 billion… That same year, Hispanics living in the United States sent more than $40 billion in remittances to support family and friends in their countries of origin.
“’Now that’s philanthropy, by any standard,’ said Orosz [Joel Orosz, professor of philanthropic studies at the Johnson Center at Grand Valley State University]. We don’t understand what’s making it tick, and exactly where those dollars are going and what it’s achieving in other countries. And that’s a hugely important issue that we’ve got to figure out and understand and give people credit for.”
Looks like Orosz needs a lesson in human labor as export, and how this philanthropy “ticks.” The issue of remittances, and contextualizing it in any dialogue of philanthropy, is problematic in many ways. Immigrants who remit do not see their actions as philanthropy; rather this money goes from family to family, for basic necessities like food, clothing, shelter, and education. In the Philippines for example, where a rough estimate of remittances ten years ago reached $6 billion (USD), remittances hardly find its way into NGOs or charities, and is quickly spent on basic day to day necessities of families.
Basically, the money is “achieving” a decent standard of living for families in countries, in South America and Asia, and other places, that are steeped in political unrest, economic instability, high rates of poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, and poor if not failing health and educational systems.
In other words, this generous $40 billion figure coming from the fastest growing minority population, is not a blanket indication of affluence much less knowledge of philanthropy or the charitable sector. On the other hand, this $40 billion is probably a low figure if you take into account the remittances not officially counted, such as those remitted by undocumenteds.
Philanthropic experts, such as Mr. Orosz, when looking at these figures, need to take a step back, and realize that this kind of giving does not come out of the kindness and generosity of affluent hearts. They partially come from the back-broken, overworked, underpaid, perhaps even most likely undocumented or trafficked. This kind of giving comes from the fields of Delano, California, the canneries of Alaska, the sweatshops in Chinatowns. And yet they still give billions of dollars to family members back home, because they know that living standards are even worse there.
These communities have much to overcome before even beginning to think about their “charitable giving” and its achievements and impact. The very communities in the U.S. from which the $40 billion to Hispanic countries and the $6 billion to the Philippines come are communities which lack the very basics of social services—affordable housing, language access, health care, educational opportunities, etc.
Considering that in 2003 the nation’s largest foundations only allocated 0.9 percent of their grant dollars to immigrant populations in the U.S., Mr. Orosz should be more concerned about how and why U.S. philanthropy fails to serve these populations, rather than trying to understand the hows and whys of their own giving.
posted by NCRP at
4:21 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Blog Home