Public Attitudes on Foreign Assistance

There used to be strong feeling among the American public that we should solve problems at home first. We can now take advantage of openings in the post-9/11 environment to educate the public on the need for development assistance. The local-global connection is more evident than ever.

In their presentations, volunteers should help their audiences make a personal connection to the people and the place where they the assignments took place. Volunteers should show not only how their efforts affect immediate beneficiaries but also, if possible, how they address global problems. Demonstrate that involvement in international economic development is in America's best interests.

The public is more favorable toward foreign assistance than before 9/11 but have lingering fear that aid hasn't worked. Tell how it has.

They seem to prefer the word "assistance" to "aid."

They are generally favorable toward nongovernmental organizations and nonprofits like ACDI/VOCA. They tend to conceive of aid as cash gifts to governments, to which they are opposed.

They prefer specific objectives over broad goals ("ending poverty" or "economic growth"). Results-oriented goals and data are more persuasive than success stories. Surveys have identified the following desired goals (in order) on the part of the American public: promote peace and democracy, provide basic education, medicines and health care, teach farming and job skills.

The public responds best to messages focusing on self-sufficiency, a safe world and healthy populations (especially children). The highest rated message is: "Give a man a fish and he'll eat today. Teach a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime."

Sally Struthers-type appeals for donations on TV, accompanied by heart-wrenching scenes of suffering, are reviewed unfavorably by focus groups. Guilt is not the best motivator—Americans want to hear about success and progress.

The public is not particularly receptive to the message that terrorism is rooted in poverty. After all, the 9/11 hijackers weren't poor.

Voters resent implication that the U.S. is responsible for terrorist attacks because of insufficient aid.

Voters respond to moral arguments, i.e., Marshall Plan, golden rule, right thing to do. However, they don't believe we have an obligation to help. They don't want to be depressed but will respond to facts that indicate suffering. They are interested in how the U.S. benefits from foreign assistance.

They are more interested in issues affecting women when they're expressed as issues affecting "women and girls."

They want partnerships. They have the impression that the U.S. goes it alone.

They hear less than we think about the world unless it affects their interests, e.g., farm markets/prices, or has taken on the proportions of a full-blown crisis. They are aware that globalization is inevitable and want "our children to compete."

Voters are much more interested in the domestic economy than the global one and therefore our conventional message about international broad-based economic growth does not resonate well. Therefore, ACDI/VOCA's activities need to be explained in terms of the incremental impact of each volunteer assignment and the complementary systemic work we do that, overall helps impressive numbers of individuals.

Short factual statements of success are more effective than longer personalized success stories.

Give people a range of specific ways to take action. They might apply to become a volunteer themselves, join ACDI/VOCA as a member or engage in political advocacy on behalf of our style of foreign assistance.