Before reading this post and answering the questions, please watch the video found HERE.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Given the conversation we had last class about Superbowl t-shirts ending up being sold in Sub-Saharan Africa, I thought a recent ban on secondhand clothes being sold in Uganda would be a great topic of discussion. I have always thought about how these clothes (sometimes donated form the US or UK) hurt local textile factories, but I did not think about two other important factors that are brought up in the video: cheap alternatives to donated goods (imports from China) and the people trying to make a living selling the now banned goods.
Have you ever considered these factors (the disadvantage to local businesses, imports from China, and the needs of those selling secondhand clothes from the US and UK)?
What similarities do you see between this economic situation in Uganda and those in the US?
Do you think these similarities allow for a better connection to and understanding of Uganda? Why?
Popular Posts
-
A few days ago, we visited our first school in Uganda! As an education major, this greatly excited me. It was raining in the morning and a b...
-
Students and Faculty from Drake will be returning to Kampala in May, 2010! The faculty are excited to return to Uganda and see our friends ...
-
The Drake University faculty and student participants in the 7 th annual Sustainability in sub-Saharan Africa study abroad program depart... -
Traveling to the Ndere Center, we were able to learn traditional music, dance, and drama in Uganda. We learned about the three different typ...
-
Everyone is finishing final exams and busy packing for our departure to Uganda in one week. The professors are looking forward to seeing al...
This is a very interesting post and the news item from Al Jazeera was a good piece. As I think about this, with any major change like this, there are going to be winners and losers. I'm not so much worried about the imports from China but folks who sell the used clothing will most certainly be hurt. It may also be that consumers get hurt (like the first woman interviewed suggested). The other side of this, though, is that the kinds of jobs that could potentially be created might well be better paying jobs. Industrial jobs tend to be more permanent and better paid than people hawking clothes and so the trade off (it it actually materializes) may well be worth it.
ReplyDeleteIf you follow the debate here in the US over the tariffs on steel and aluminum, we might well find some parallels.
I appreciate that you brought up the parallels with the tariffs on steel and aluminum. While there are plenty arguments on the macro level about this being harmful to international trade, there is a steal mill in my home town that is rehiring its laid off employees. I think it is very interesting to look at these similarities; it helps us realize that the situations in Uganda aren't that far away from what we experience here in the US.
DeleteIn a recent Developing Econ lecture, we watched Poverty Inc on Netflix (I would highly recommend watching it before we leave) and it touched on this exact issue. There are certain points in a country's economic development and sustainability where a country leaves a dependent-post disaster stage, and where people no longer need to be supported with resources because it begins to hurt the economy more than helping. This is also true for the commodities markets such as rice, steel, precious metals, etc in these countries. The suggested solution is not for us to continuously give these countries free materials, but to give people the opportunity to be employed in a job where they can create value within a country and turn resources into value added products. This is a very controversial point, but definitely open for research and discussion. Great topic!
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteThe conversation around donations, foreign aid and some of the drivers of the interests by westerners in Africa is truly ages old. Dr. Kwame Nkrumah the first president of Ghana spoke and wrote extensively about Africa's continuous struggle to develop despite being rich in mineral resources. The forces that ensure that millions of people in Africa stay deprived are subtle but their impact on the African people is real and not painless. Since time, foreign relationships throughout the continent have had certain consistent characteristics: enriching a few political elites (as longs as they protect imperialist interests) while impoverishing the masses, and ascertaining that African dependency stays alive. You will notice the love Ugandans have for KFC even though healthier and significantly cheaper chicken alternatives are abundantly available.
In one his famous quotes, Dr. Nkrumah says “Africa is a paradox which illustrates and highlights neo-colonialism. Her earth is rich, yet the products that come from above and below the soil continue to enrich, not Africans predominantly, but groups and individuals who operate to Africa’s impoverishment.”