Course material

1. The legitimacy of international NGOs The 2018 Oxfam scandal and the...
The legitimacy of international NGOs
The 2018 Oxfam scandal and the responses that followed it signal a fundamental change in
how international non-governmental organizations (INGOs) must advance accountability
and transparency. Focusing on the UK, this article has examined the scandal's history and
the reactions to it from Oxfam GB and Oxfam International, other INGOs, funders, and
regulators tasked with monitoring them.
To address the question of whether INGOs are reliable development actors, the article has
referenced a variety of sources. Data from the Charities Aid Foundation and other sources,
interviews with significant figures at the center of the scandal, and documents and reports
created by organizations directly involved in the scandal's response have all been consulted.
Additionally, it has referenced contextual documents from various INGOs and
intergovernmental organizations, such as BOND, the Independent Commission for Aid
Impact, and others.
According to the article, the 2018 Oxfam scandal serves as an example of a fundamental
change in how INGOs must advance accountability and transparency. Transnational NGOs
(TNGOs) provide a positive, pro-poor alternative to the state and market in the provision of
public goods and services and the facilitation of social inclusion and political participation.
They also provide a credible discursive alternative to the economic neo-liberalism of the
mainstream development enterprise. Evidence, however, suggests that they have fallen
short of these demands, particularly when it comes to creating novel methods for legitimacy
and accountability and collaborating with donors and other actors. Nevertheless, NGOs
continue to stand out from both the public and the private sector as credible and moral
organizations that pursue admirable objectives, draw committed workers who toil for little
pay and carry out admirable work.
According to the article, in order for INGOs to maintain their credibility, they must
concentrate on four key issues: endorsing causes with shared interests, sending expensive
signals, paying a price for lying, and making themselves available for external scrutiny and
verification. To achieve this, they must actively foster relationships based on common
values, support and defend autonomous governance structures, uphold transparency,

2. professionalize, collaborate with other NGOs, assimilate into the larger NGO community,
and make costly investments in areas unrelated to their core business. Figure 1 depicts this
hypothesized foundation for NGOs' credibility as well as proposed solutions to any
problems with it.
The article has examined the 2018 Oxfam scandal in order to respond to three key
questions: what caused the scandal, what was done in response to the scandal, and the
proposed framework for the credibility of INGOs. It has been argued that Oxfam GB failed to
make the proper decisions regarding safeguarding during 2015-17, which resulted in
insufficient resourcing and capability. In January and June of 2019, the Independent
Commission on Sexual Misconduct and Cultural Change acknowledged the seriousness of
the errors and made recommendations for an efficient safety-promoting culture. It has been
determined that criticisms of Oxfam GB and other INGOs came from the left and focused on
racial and gender issues in light of the Haiti scandal.
The article has also discussed the steps Oxfam GB, and other INGOs have taken to rebuild
public trust following the scandal. The launch of an independent whistleblower helpline,
new policies on reference requests, and a tripling of Oxfam GB's annual safeguarding budget
to £720,000 were among the new safeguarding initiatives that were announced. In order to
protect female recipients and employees of international aid organizations, NGOs have
called for transformative action. Oxfam International has launched an investigation into
Oxfam GB, the Charity Commission has opened a Statutory Inquiry, DFID has called a
conference on international safeguarding, Interpol and ACPO have launched Project Soteria.
According to the article, the 2018 Oxfam scandal represents a fundamental change in how
INGOs must support accountability and transparency based on high-quality, learning-based
management. It is obvious that the steps were taken by Oxfam GB and other INGOs to
rebuild public confidence after the scandal were insufficient. To maintain their credibility,
NGOs must continue to concentrate on these four key issues: supporting and defending
autonomous governance structures; increasing transparency; professionalizing;
collaborating with other NGOs; integrating into the larger NGO community; and investing in
pricey areas unrelated to their primary activities.
Only by doing this will INGOs be able to pursue their admirable objectives, draw committed
workers who work for little pay, and perform admirable work while maintaining their
credibility and virtue in the eyes of the public. The 2018 Oxfam scandal serves as a
reminder that in order to maintain their credibility as actors in the development sector,
INGOs must make costly investments in areas unrelated to their core business, increase
transparency, and work with other NGOs.
In conclusion, the 2018 Oxfam scandal has brought to light the necessity for INGOs to invest
in pricey areas unrelated to their primary activities, increase transparency, and collaborate
with other NGOs to remain credible actors in the development sector. Even though the

3. scandal has negatively impacted INGOs' reputations, there is still a chance for them to grow
from the experience and take the necessary actions to rebuild public confidence in the
industry. NGOs have a foundation for doing this in the proposed framework for the
credibility of INGOs and proposed responses to any challenges to that credibility.
Ref;
Gourevich, E., Guevara, M., & Nesbitt-Ahmed, Z. (2012). The credibility of transnational
NGOs: a framework for assessing performance. International Affairs, 88(3), 545-562.
write it in APA writing format and give at least 6 references