The development industry has necessarily changed over the decades since its inception, as global trends in poverty, policy, social norms, and conflict evolve. Recently, these transformations have been especially dramatic, as sustainable development has seen notable setbacks thanks to the Covid-19 Pandemic and the emergence of other global crises. There is now greater importance placed on measuring and showing impact, on do-no-harm and, and, in recent years, on decolonizing aid. This evolution in how development is done has changed what it means to be a development practitioner.
In this blog series, we speak with development veterans, each with notable experience working in humanitarian assistance, economic growth, health systems, democracy and governance, stabilization, agriculture resilience, sustainability, education and youth, and infrastructure to learn how the International Development industry has evolved during their career.
Our first Development Practitioner is Lorea Russell. She is a Technical Director at Blumont, and uses her 15 years of development experience to oversee a portfolio of humanitarian assistance, resilience, and essential services projects in Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and Colombia. Lorea is also a Practitioner in Residence at the University of Maryland, where she co-instructs a capstone course on International Development and Conflict Management.
Lorea has a M.S. in Foreign Service from Georgetown University, where she focused on International Conflict Management, and received a Refugees and Humanitarian Emergencies Certificate from ISIM. Lorea earned her B.S. in Political Science and B.A. in French from Santa Clara University.
How long have you been in the International Development Industry? How did you come to this industry in the first place?
I started my career in the United States working for the municipal government in San Jose, California—specifically focusing on housing policy. After three years watching the inefficacy of local government in supporting people experiencing homelessness, I realized I wanted to try something different and work in a government institution that did more for communities, and somewhere I could use my language skills. Looking globally, I recognized that refugees, in a sense, are also people who experience housing instability, but across borders. At the time, I was naive in thinking that other governments cared about refugees and displaced peoples. Nevertheless, I knew that because I spoke two languages and liked to travel, perhaps a career in international development was right for me. That’s when I decided to go to Georgetown Walsh School of Foreign Studies, which I attended from 2003-2005.
What is your industry specialization, and how did you become an expert in that specialization?
It took a few years for me to find the sweet spot. In the summer of 2004, while I was at Georgetown, I went to Uganda to do research on the effectiveness of psychosocial programs on child soldiers. While there, I also offered grant writing workshops using the skills I acquired working in the San Jose government. That work experience really helped me understand how to mobilize communities, and how United States government funding worked.
During my last year at Georgetown, I worked at the National Democratic Institute on democratization and governance projects. My internship there was ultimately extended because they valued my grant writing skills I picked up in the San Jose job. Ultimately I didn’t love governance-type projects, and tried my hand in the health sector at Population Services International (PSI). I became exposed to emergency response and humanitarianism at PSI,, and fell in love. At the same time, I also became aware of the “old” way of doing development, which was often dictated by older white men in big houses with no real connection to communities they are working to “help” leading programming that made little difference because of how terribly designed the projects were.
After graduating, I worked at Internews, which I really enjoyed but only lasted 6 months after a corporate restructuring resulted in recent hires being let go. I then applied to a business development role at International Medical Corps (IMC) to get back into humanitarian response programs, and ran things right away. I paid my dues for 1.5 years, working long hours on difficult projects for low pay, before I realized I was getting underpaid. I got a counter offer from a competitor, which IMC matched and led to a massive increase in pay and a field role (some advice: only seek a competing offer to leverage for more pay if you are willing to actually work at the competitor!). My first field role was a regional Middle East junior expat working with Iraqi refugees. I loved it, but it was very challenging work.
How would you describe your early career?
My early career was characterized by a mix of backstopping programs in organizations’ Washington DC headquarters and working in the field. I was in the Middle East regional role less than a year before being asked to go to Afghanistan. I was known, even early in my career, as the “fixer”. When countries are about to shut down because of any sort of crisis, IMC would send me to assess the situation on the ground and write proposals. I bounced between Jordan and Syria, and was one of the few Americans in Syria at the time. I was eventually poached by DAI in Afghanistan for a regional monitoring and evaluation role - which was a new role for me. The international community in Kabul is very small, and I mentioned to a higher-up at DAI how off-the-mark their scopes of work were. They realized they needed quality control on their projects, and wanted me to help them.
After two years in Afghanistan, I returned to California to work for a social enterprise in Silicon Valley as a consultant. The company worked with Google Glass to introduce the technology in Ugandan villages. I was tasked with assessing how Ugandans interact with technology, acquire jobs, and maximize income. It felt like a futile effort to me; instead of increasing incomes, tech companies just wanted to show that their products are being used in Uganda? It was a complete mismatch with what the community’s needs were. I decided then that the private sector and social enterprises weren’t for me.
How have you seen the industry change throughout your career?
There is definitely more awareness and effort in actively trying to decolonize international development. For a long time, the model has been from the Global North based on “we know how you should fix your government,” ignoring that for centuries it was enslavement and exploitation that built our economies. The aim of international development was paternalistic for a long time. There is now an agreement that aid should be decentralized and localization must be front and center. A farmer in Senegal knows a lot more than I do about what they need - how do we do development in a way that puts their true needs front and center, rather than us telling them what they need? We can provide suggestions that these communities may not have considered, but they must be the ones that make the final decision. I see the industry moving toward collaboration - the places we are working to support have a lot to teach us about how to help people. You see this push in USAID’s relatively recent localization policy, although sometimes the policy is disingenuous. Local organizations do not have the financial systems to accept USAID’s money, which perpetuates the power struggle.
I also see the international development industry putting greater emphasis on engaging the private sector. Donor governments will never have enough resources to respond to the world’s needs, and relying on government funding is not a sustainable approach in the long run. The issue is that, right now, private sector engagement is more transactional than impactful. I don’t have a solution for this, but I know it’s a huge focus in international development right now.
In your opinion, What is being overlooked or not being done well in the development industry currently?
We want local organizations to get more money to support their own communities. The problem is that the international development system wasn’t designed to be local. It is an industry established to further foreign policy— international development is a huge soft diplomacy tool. We, as development practitioners, like to think we are neutral parties, but in reality we are conduits to further foreign policy. This sort of soft power will never go away. What international development focuses on is highly dependent on who the president is and their administration’s priorities. That leads to inconsistent development efforts globally.
I would love to see international development contractors understand their roles in the global system. I want to see those roles change from dictating how activities are to be implemented to facilitating and creating systems that support those closer to the system.
What excites you about your career and the future of development?
I’m excited to see how the industry maximizes immersive technology to make programming more efficient and reflective of localization needs. The Covid-19 Pandemic really accelerated the use of technology, and made us realize what can be possible as far as the use-cases and constraints of remote technology. For example, while the world stayed at home, we implemented an online training project with religious leaders in Iraq to foster inclusion. We also integrated use of e wallets and mobile payments in other projects - something we didn’t think to do previously. But international development implementers need to know how to actually use technology effectively, and not just introduce cool and innovative tech that does not fit the community’s needs or capabilities.
What advice do you have for young development practitioners as they enter the industry?
Your career won’t be linear. International development is simultaneously a small industry with vast options. It is ok to jump around a bit - in the beginning of my career I went to a new role every 1-2 years. It is normal in this industry to have short stints at different organizations, so don’t be concerned about how that may look on your resume. It’s how you tell the story of why you’ve bounced around. Find the jobs that make you excited to do the challenging work. You’ll need to pay your dues like everyone else, like doing the boring back-office admin work, but don’t let that discourage you.
Don’t be rude or intolerant. International Development is small, and we all know each other. Having a negative reputation will cost you jobs. In some field roles, you eat, sleep, work, exercise, socialize, and exist with the same people, which lends itself to reality-show type drama. But, be very deliberate about burning bridges, be respectful of your colleagues and the communities you work with, and never act like you’re too good to do the brunt work.
I’d also recommend you maintain strong relationships with your classmates. You will run into these people all over the world, and they will be doing impressive and important things. You never know when those connections will come in handy!