Page 1 of 6
Timothy Baker
Send International Office Intern
20 April 2011
Effective Poverty Alleviation
Warren Janzen asked me to read and summarize When Helping Hurts: How To Alleviate Poverty
Without Hurting the Poor … And Yourself. The book was written by two Christian economic development
experts, Steve Corbett and Brian Fikkert, who work for the Chalmers Institute. These are roughly
grouped into five main themes, though there is a lot of overlap.
The Relational Model
The foundation for When Helping Hurts is a theory of four relationships. While this belief that
God is a relational being and that He created us to be relational did not originate with them, it is an
essential theory to understand the rest of their advice. This concept actually comes from Bryant Myers,
identified by the authors as a leading Christian development theorist.
The first relationship that all men have is between them and God. Not between man and some
divine power, but between a fully formed human being and the one true God. We were created
primarily to praise God, which is our calling. (58) This is the most important relationship, with “…the
other three relationships flowing out of this one.” (57) The poverties of spiritual intimacy (being in a
wrong relationship with God) are: denying God’s existence and authority, materialism and worshipping
false gods and spirits. (61) It is important to note that the problems on this list affect rich western
cultures as well as the poor.
The second relationship is the one that we have with ourselves. Humans have the unique
privilege of being created in the image of God. (58) It is this knowledge that is supposed to give people
their self-worth. This relationship with self is the one that most often gets in the way when the
materially rich are trying to help the materially poor. Poor people can think of themselves as inferior and
unable to act to improve their own circumstances (64). These feelings can only be enhanced when those
who are giving to the poor experience a “god-complex” (65). This occurs when the rich feel as if they
have earned their money. They begin to think that they can then tell the poor what to do and have
feelings of superiority toward the poor. This is a harmful formula for both the materially poor and the
materially non-poor (67 & 153). Unfortunately, most poverty alleviation efforts are designed in a way
that actually makes these unhealthy relationships worse (65). This is addressed more fully in later
paragraphs.
The next foundation is our relationship with other humans. This relationship is broken by selfcenteredness and exploitation or abuse by others (61). An example of this is people living in the ghetto
who have no value for the lives of others. (86)
The last relationship is with the rest of creation. God called humanity to interact with the rest of
creation because, “while God made the world ‘perfect,’ He left it ‘incomplete’” (58). Mainly it comes
into play with the Development phase of poverty alleviation. Individuals have to come into a right
Page 2 of 6
relationship with God in order for them to conquer their fear of animistic spirits and begin to steward
the natural world.
Everything is Broken
After recognizing the four relationships, it is also important to admit that the Fall affected all of
creation. All animals, all men and all systems are broken, including those in the West. (61) We are all
broken (84), and according to the relational model of poverty, we all need some kind of poverty
alleviation of relationships (79). If we do not realize this then our missions have the potential to not only
hurt those we are trying to help but also ourselves (67 & 153).
This universal brokenness means that we should not act paternalistically toward any cultures.
(115) The definition of paternalism used here is doing something for someone that they could do
themselves (115). This paternalism can come in many different forms.
The first is resource paternalism. This happens when the materially rich flood local markets with
cheap goods in the name of charity. While it might be easy to hold a clothing drive and then donate
those clothes to the materially poor, this might actually do more harm than good because local
economies might depend on the sale of textiles or shoes. (115) This applies doubly to money. This is a
classic give a man a fish versus teaching him how to fish problem.
The next type of paternalism is spiritual. The materially poor live in a more precarious position
than those of us in the West do, and they may actually be closer to God because of it. Also, we must
remember that while the world is in a wrong relationship with God, Jesus is the sustainer and reconciler
of all things (59). “For by him [Jesus] all things were created; things in heaven and on earth, visible and
invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.
He is before all things, and in him all things hold together (Colossians 1:16-17).” Therefore we are not
actually taking God to the poor, we are simply going to another country to look for God’s continued
presence there. (60) This is not to say that all poor people will have a relationship with God, but it is a
reminder that some may know Jesus and worship Him in ways that would seem strange to outsiders.
This does not make it wrong.
Another problem that must often be dealt with is knowledge paternalism. Knowledge
paternalism is when someone assumes that the way that they know how to do things is the only way
and the best way to do them.
For example, during the first several decades after World War II, the leading Western
economists and agriculturalists concluded that peasant farmers were irrational and culturally
backward because the farmers failed to adopt new varieties of crops that had higher average
yields. Subsequent research discovered that the farmers were, indeed, acting very rationally.
While the new crop varieties had higher average yields, these new crops also had much greater
variation in their yields from year to year than the farmers’ traditional varieties. For farmers
living in highly vulnerable situations in which a bad crop could result in starvation for their
children, it was better to choose the low-risk-low-reward traditional varieties that the high-risk-
Page 3 of 6
high-return new varieties, particularly in a setting in which the landlords and loan sharks tended
to reap the majority of any increase in profit. (116)
Many North Americans have knowledge and experience that can be beneficial to those in the majority
world. What is important to remember is that we in the West are far from perfect. We must be
especially careful when we are dealing with local churches, since they already have the good news of
Jesus and should be able to ask for or refuse our help because of their knowledge of local conditions. If
they do not ask for our help, that means they probably do not need it and we would be foolish to try
and force it (whatever it might be) on them.
The Biblical Mandate
If poverty is actually a problem with relationships, and those relationships can only be fixed by
the power of God, it would stand to reason that the Bible would have some interest in poverty. There
are in fact many examples of a biblical mandate to alleviate poverty. Examples come from the Old
Testament laws, the ministry of Jesus and the apostles’ works after His death.
The reason that Jesus came to earth is central to Christianity. Without Jesus’ perfect sacrifice we
live apart from God for eternity. That was not the only thing that Jesus came to do. According to the
authors he came to bring a kingdom of God that was a renewal of all things through spiritual forces (32).
This definition fits nicely with the thesis that poverty is about four broken relationships. Bible passages
cited in defense of this theory include Luke 4:17–21; 4:43; Isaiah 9:7; 35:1-6; 53:5; 61:1-2.
God also gave many laws to the Jews concerning debt relief and care for the poor (Leviticus
19:9-10; 25:35-38 and Deuteronomy 14:28-29). Besides these ancient laws, Matthew 25:31-46 and I
John 3:17 both show that poverty alleviation is an integral part of the church’s ministry to the world.
Many evangelicals used to be involved with social welfare projects. This was true from the very
beginning of the church (41) as well as in the United States. What happened to that commitment?
During the events of “The Great Reversal” conservative evangelicals pulled back from working with the
poor in the early twentieth century when theological liberals began to preach the social gospel (45).
Unfortunately many evangelicals walked away from the poor completely, rather than be associated with
the social gospel. This Great Reversal also had negative effects on missions as well as home churches.
African converts may never be taught the Bible verses mentioned earlier. A refocusing of the missionary
efforts occurred toward the protection and collection of souls (47). [It is my opinion that the lack of
holistic missionary efforts may have more to do with the end of colonialism and the loss of government
funds for mission schools and charitable organizations than it does with the Great Reversal.] Regardless,
missions organizations that do not embrace caring for the welfare of the people that they are
ministering to are failing in one of the key areas of Jesus’ ministry.
While the church has a direct responsibility to try to end poverty, the church is not the only one
responsible for trying to alleviate poverty. (46) Matthew 25:31-46, I Timothy 5:8, Daniel 4:27 and Psalms
72 all mention the role of other institutions in helping the poor. These include individuals, families and
governments. (46) This is of course not the same as the authors’ insistence that the ultimate solution to
Page 4 of 6
poverty is coming into a right relationship with God. (77) That difference may come from the fact that
the authors were not ready to reveal their thesis early in the book.
Poverty is not a lack of resources
At this stage in the authors’ argument it should be fairly obvious that they do not believe that
poverty is a lack of material resources. It is damaged relationships that will only be fully fixed by God.
Poverty can more succinctly be called a mentality that must be changed to truly be alleviated. It is a trap
that takes away that person’s ability to make decisions for himself. Even if the conditions in which they
find themselves are not actually completely hopeless, they may think that there is nothing that they can
do about their poverty. Part of this is a cultural problem, but the other part is tied directly to the four
relationships. We must also be careful about focusing upon lack of material possessions, because the
poor may actually be closer to God than we in the West are.
Often, North Americans will place too much of an emphasis on material possessions. In When
Helping Hurts the authors instead point out the views that the poor themselves have about poverty.
According to the examples that are given by the authors (53) the poor will often speak of their poverty
in social terms. This will often include shame and hopelessness. Even when these people mention
material goods, it is when they cannot interact with their friends because they do not have any gifts for
them, an important social interaction. These feelings reflect the lack of good relationships. More money
will not change their situation because of another non-material aspect of poverty.
Since poverty is not a lack of resources it must be something else. Instead it is a lack of ability to
make meaningful decisions in your own life. (77) The poor might know intellectually that it would be
beneficial for them to spend extra money on healthier foods, but they have to spend their money on the
same things every week. Likewise it is better for people to save their money and build up assets. In some
poor communities the value of life is so low that many people, especially young people, do not believe
that they will live long enough to see their hard work saving for the future actually paying off, so they do
not save. (86) One way to overcome this facet of poverty is to get the poor themselves involved in the
process of distributing goods and resources, instead of simply telling them what is best for them. (142)
Participation by the poor is not a means to an end, “but rather a legitimate end in its own right.” (145)
Those that are involved in the planning and participation stages will be more likely to commit to longterm goals and will be more likely to actually build plans that are relevant to the local context. (144)
Planning also gives the poor great self-confidence and self-worth.
There is another danger to focusing strictly on material possessions. It may be possible to teach
the poor healthy work habits, timeliness and even smart investing and saving. If we do that without
telling those same people about the God who provides all resources we run the risk of replacing their
poverty with the social problems that stem from wealth and comfort. The authors call this teaching the
Protestant work ethic without the God who inspired it. (94) Wealth and comfort is not an indicator of
spiritual fulfillment or happiness, because if it were the United States would have the lowest rates of
suicide, divorce, drug use and church attendance. [When the authors wrote about the poor feeling
shunned or embarrassed, I believe that they were mainly speaking of the views of the unsaved poor.] I
Page 5 of 6
believe this because they also talk about how the poor may actually have a deeper walk with Christ
because they know that they rely on Him for their daily need. (116) We risk damaging their relationship
with God if our actions and programs imply that money and wealth are the true keys to happiness.
Strategies that work (and strategies that do not)
Since poverty is a collection of broken relationships, the majority of current efforts to alleviate
poverty are not actually helping the problem. By focusing on the obvious, lack of material possessions,
donors often latch onto the easy: money. In reality they are treating the symptoms, not the problem.
(55) Here are critiques of current efforts as well as several different types of practical strategies for
alleviating poverty.
An important detail that is often overlooked when formulating poverty alleviation strategies is
the difference between Relief, Rehabilitation and Development. (104) Relief is characterized by
immediate assistance in the form of donations of food, clothing or money. Principles for good relief are
Seldom, Immediate and Temporary. (110) The immediate part of relief means that agencies should have
plans in place to respond to a variety of disasters so that the agency can respond quickly enough to
actually help with relief. Unfortunately, distribution of resources is too often the strategy chosen even
for situations that would be better served with some other form of assistance. It is important to keep
our own views of standards of living in check. (108) Only a few classes of citizens should qualify for
relief: disaster victims, young orphans and the severely disabled. (108)
Much of what the author sees wrong with North American Relief efforts can also be applied to
Short Term Missions (STM). (166) The costs are higher than economic relief efforts can justify. In fact the
cost of a single STM can pay the salaries of several local workers who would have a greater impact on
poverty alleviation efforts. (173) Notice that they are not saying that STMs do not have their place for
recruiting or spirit building, but they are saying that STMs have a tendency to create more problems for
the economically poor than they fix. Several ways to improve STMs include: only going on trips where
the host community has asked for and planned for a STM team, ensure that the focus of the trip is on
learning and not “saving,” and having a plan that makes sure the team is only providing services that the
community cannot provide. (175-179)
The next step in effective poverty alleviation is Rehabilitation. This involves sitting down with
the poor community members and asking them to talk about their gifts and abilities, ensuring that the
community members are partners in the development of and implementation of strategies, and
providing assistance evenly and impartially. (111-112) Rehabilitation utilizes abilities and resources that
are already present in the community.
Development is the last stage, and uses the community to move everyone, including the donors
and volunteers, toward a closer relationship with God. (105) It also helps to cultivate new resources that
the community may not have had before. This last
It is important to note that not all agencies can provide all three levels of alleviation. (119) Some
will be better set up to provide relief, but it is also harder to get donors to give to rehabilitation and
Page 6 of 6
development efforts if they are focused on relief. Good alleviation efforts will focus on relationships, not
results. (83)
Truly effective poverty alleviation is time and relationship costly, not resource costly. Donors
need to understand that this is a process, not a product, which would simply be capitalism. (83) This is
especially true when dealing with cultures that have a polychronic view of time. (163) Our Western
concept of time is monochronic, so we think that time is finite and can be wasted. A polychronic view of
time sees time as the only infinite resource, since the sun will always come up tomorrow, so people and
relationships are more important than achieving immediate results. Besides different views of time,
there are realities that large amounts of money do not achieve the best results in alleviating poverty.
The World Bank gave enormous loans to post world war Europe and the countries knew how to use
those resources to quickly rebuild. When the same bank gives loans to the majority world the countries
continue to be materially poor. (51)
One strategy that is not capital intense is Microfinance (MF). MF is currently in vogue for
alleviating poverty, ever since the success shown by the Grameen Bank in promoting small businesses in
Bangladesh. (201) There are several problems with the current model of MF. The first is that the
majority of efforts are focused on urban small businesses. (207) In order to truly help they would have
to give even smaller loans for everyday expenses to the rural poor, all three of which are extremely hard
for banks who have to run branches. (207) It is equally hard for churches or missionaries to start MF loan
programs, because they are either too small to make real progress or too nice to enforce repayment.
(209) If repayment is not enforced the key product of MF is undermined, which is responsibility.
The best model for growing small businesses through micro loans is through the Promotion
model (210). This model creates Savings and Credit Associations, or groups like them, which steward the
members’ money. It is run by the members, who all meet to discuss interest rates and all vote on loans.
There is no outside money involved. The members pool their capital, use it to fund each other’s
businesses and after a predetermined period the original money and dividends are returned to every
member and the process starts over. (211) The only role that outsiders play is to encourage groups to
form and possibly facilitate a meeting place, hopefully the church building. (211) The church can then
minister to the spiritual needs of the group while God uses their own efforts to alleviate their poverty. It
is this fusion of local churches and member participation that have the greatest effect. (213)
In conclusion, poverty is often not what we in the west think it is. While many of the people we
see on the television may not have clothing to wear or food to eat, they face a bigger problem. The
problem is that they do not know Jesus. Any efforts that do not attempt to relieve both problems are
doomed to failure. While this is a summary of When Helping Hurts I would encourage everyone
interested in poverty to read it. Though this summary may prove helpful, a fuller reading and
engagement with the actual book may be more beneficial because of the use of charts and discussion
questions that I could not include in this summary.