How should INGOs allocate resources?
Loading...
Date
Authors
Wisor, Scott
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Co-Action Publishing
Abstract
International Non-governmental Organizations (INGOs) face difficult choices when choosing to
allocate resources. Given that the resources made available to INGOs fall far short of what is
needed to reduce massive human rights deficits, any chosen scheme of resource allocation requires
failing to reach other individuals in great need. Facing these moral opportunity costs, what moral
reasons should guide INGO resource allocation? Two reasons that clearly matter, and are
recognized by philosophers and development practitioners, are the consequences (or benefit or
harm reduction) of any given resource allocation and the need (or priority) of individual
beneficiaries. If accepted, these reasons should lead INGOs to allocate resources to a limited
number of countries where the most prioritarian weighted harm reduction will be achieved. I make
three critiques against this view. First, on grounds the consequentialist accepts, I argue that INGOs
ought to maintain a reasonably wide distribution of resources. Second, I argue that even if one is a
consequentialist, consequentialism ought not act as an action guiding principle for INGOs. Third,
I argue that additional moral reasons should influence decision making about INGO resource
allocation. Namely, INGO decision making should attend to relational reasons, desert, respect for
agency, concern for equity, and the importance of expressing a view of moral wrongs.
Description
Keywords
Citation
Collections
Source
Ethics & Global Politics
Type
Book Title
Entity type
Access Statement
Open Access
License Rights
Restricted until
Downloads
File
Description
Published Version