Think Globally, Act Locally.

Image from Locally Grown Clothing

Last month I had the opportunity to attend a conference that featured many sessions led by “social entrepreneurs” and “changemakers” including leaders from Tom’s Shoes, Kiva and Charity: Water. I’m fairly new to the world of social entrepreneurism and was really excited to hear from the rockstars of this world. The founder of Tom’s Shoes, Blake Mycoskie, even showed the video for their recent Day Without Shoes campaign.

After the conference, though, I was left with an uneasiness that I couldn’t quite pin down. I heard a lot of inspiring, heart-tugging stories. I heard about desperate need and I saw creative marketing ideas to engage people in causes. But something just didn’t resonate for me. I left feeling crabby and a little cynical.

I’m a pretty naturally skeptical person. But I also consider myself optimistic, and someone who believes that people have generally good intentions. So, why couldn’t I get excited about these people who were dedicating their lives to doing good?

Then I found (via Twitter) this blog post by Brigid Slipka: The Golden Rule is Flawed (So Are Toms Shoes)

Which led me to A Day Without Dignity

And a sizeable community of people who have spent much more time and thought articulating exactly what makes me uncomfortable about many international aid programs, social enterprises and particularly the combination of the two. It’s that they are based in our idea of what people want or need and not necessarily in an authentic understanding of what the people we seek to serve actually want. It’s charity from the perspective of the giver, not the receiver.

While I was mulling all this and reading more about these differing perspectives, the Three Cups of Tea controversy broke on 60 Minutes.

Basically, bestselling author and nonprofit executive director, Greg Mortenson is accused of fabricating many of the most compelling stories in his books and using his nonprofit, Central Asia Institute, as a promotional arm and a personal “ATM”. I’ve read a lot of really thoughtful writing and thinking about the Three Cups of Tea debacle in the nonprofit sphere.

There are a lot of conclusions one can draw from these examples – about effective philanthropy, about rockstar leaders, about cause related marketing. And, let me be clear, there is a big difference between misguided good intentions and deliberately deceitful practices.

But for me, the lesson is this:  There is great benefit in focusing on the local.

1. It’s harder to mythologize and romanticize the local. When you focus on the issues and opportunities in your own neighborhood, I believe, you’re more likely to understand the context of those issues and more accurately gauge the authenticity of the solutions.
2. Local is a long-term commitment. You can’t parachute in and then leave if the neighborhood you’re trying to impact is your own.
3. There’s plenty to do here. No matter what your passion is, there are opportunities to help with that cause or support that solution right here at home.

I’m certainly not advocating for a provincial or protectionist approach to philanthropy or that we limit our empathy for those in other parts of the world. But I do think that helping someone on the other side of the earth, in a culture you don’t understand, requires an enormous amount of care and research. And I believe that the best solutions for those communities are also local.

So I’m left with the question, how do we support local economies, local education and local problem-solving in every community?

Note: Image from Locally Grown Clothing (you can also find their products at many of the local co-ops)

~ Laura Zabel is a guest contributor.