Humanist

The Context

This is the story of an economically well designed life insurance scheme for members of a Ugandan individual membership development organisation; an association with thousands of members from all over Uganda.

Association members being over 2,500 men and women living in relative poverty; able to meet their basic needs, but unable to meet all their genuine needs; and to be self-reliant. They are the typical majority of populations in African countries, such as Uganda, categorized as ‘developing’ and or ‘third world’.

The scheme was initiated in response to member concerns that were raised at a General Assembly (400 members in attendance) – “members want our association to do something whenever a member or their family member dies.”

The scheme was thus designed to benefit threefold:

• Enable the Association to do something when a member died
• Be an incentive for membership in the Association
• A source of income for the Association’s development work

The Life Insurance Scheme

Proposed by the Association’s Secretariat, the life insurance scheme for members and their families was to be run in such a way that members would insure themselves and their family members, individually, by paying an annual premium to the Association.

There were two types of premiums, for adults and for children, and with different benefits. The highest annual premium was the equivalent of US$ 8, for which the benefit, if the insured died, was that their family would be given US$ 130, sixteen times more than the premium.

Taking into consideration the Association’s member death rate of the previous years, the Secretariat determined that the scheme would need to have at least 200 members subscribed, in order for it to be ‘profitable’.

The Association Board of Directors, on behalf of the General Assembly, unanimously approved the scheme. Nevertheless, it failed. only an insignificant number, 20 members, subscribed; and it was abandoned two years later.

Why Initiative in response to public need from bottom failed

The power of the African-Ugandan belief that it is a taboo to prepare for your own death and/or that of a member of your family, was underestimated by the designers of the scheme. They missed the point that gestures that are without defined monetary value were just as important to the members. Such gestures as a letter from the leaders to be read at the funeral, an obituary in the newsletter, an official representative at the funeral, among others.

In addition, the Secretariat under considered the possibility that members wanted collective response to a member’s death. Work should stop for a day, for example. The power of the African-Uganda belief of spare no-cost to give a loved one a befitting send off, was grossly under considered by the Secretariat. Members likely expected Association funds raised for ‘development’ work to be set aside and to be used to make contributions towards costs for members’ funerals.

While at the same time, the ability of members to grasp and understand the global-western concept of insurance, was overestimated. The scheme was essentially designed on the basis of global-western values and with emphasis of aspects that members did not find culturally acceptable.

The Secretariat did not fully appreciate that members did not want a solution, which required individual decisions to prepare for their own death. Members could actually have afforded to pay the US$ 8 annual premium, considering that they freely and willingly paid US$ 4 annually in membership fees. Some had paid US$ 40 in life membership fees.

In fact, the Association annually raised US$ 4,500 from membership fees. Members paid their membership dues without expectation of a clearly defined monitory benefit in return. But when requested to pay an annual insurance premium, for which the benefit was clearly defined in monetary terms – life insurance payouts, the members declined to do so.

In summary, the economics was right, but it did not fit in the context of the culture of most of the members. The scheme was global-western in design and was inconsistent with the value system of the members. It was doomed from the very beginning for it’s designers prioritized global-western logic and failed to see the flaws in the design.

Lessons from the failed Life Insurance Scheme

Lesson 1: Basis of many ‘development interventions’ for Africa trivialize African cultures.

In her book: “The Challenge for Africa – A new vision,” Nobel Laureate Wangari Maathai devoted a whole chapter “Culture: The Missing Link?” in which she discusses the importance of taking seriously African cultural heritage. She points out that for decades there has been a deliberate trivialization of African cultures.

African-Ugandan cultural beliefs, norms and practices in relation to death and funerals are a challenge for many ‘development organizations’ and also the Government of Uganda. A government minister, for example, went to the extent of suggesting that funeral ceremonies should be held only on weekends, in order for politicians and civil servants to engage in “productive ventures other than spending several days away mourning the dead.”

The Secretariat, likely unintentionally, did trivialize the African-Uganda cultures. Inevitably so, since, cultural norms and values reflected in ‘development programmes’ in Uganda are more likely to be those of the funding partners. In the case of Uganda they are mostly from the global-west.

This is as opposed to programmes for Uganda reflecting or being based on the cultural norms and values of the people for whom they proclaim to benefit. Case in point, there are countless self-help groups in rural Uganda in which the members have successfully set up burial funds and yet the scheme the scheme that was designed by the Secretariat was not similarly embraced by members.

The way in which the burial funds of self-help groups are set up is different from the concept of a global-western type insurance scheme. Self-help group burial schemes are set up in such a way that members view them as a collective effort to support each other at time of need.

As in, when a member dies, the actions and decisions are taken collectively as a group and there is no monetary profit for the individual members or the self-help group (premium payments).

Lesson 2: Dominant view of ‘development’ is global-western, mostly equates ‘development’ with economic growth

Studies have found that Africans are generally not homo economicus – they make decisions according to a precise rationality that encompasses elements other than the cost-profit relationship, but not necessarily excluding the cost-profit relationship.

Whereas, in Uganda, people attach a lot of importance to burial rituals and ceremonies, it is unlikely that there is a global-western ‘development’ funding organisation that will grant funds for that purpose. An example, indeed, of prevalent contradictions within many non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in Uganda.

Considering that NGOs view and present themselves as the ‘official representatives’ of the Ugandan civil society. It is not uncommon, in fact, for NGOs to assert that they are the ‘official voice of the voiceless’. But are they really?

Apparently not always, as evidenced by the failed life insurance scheme. The technocrats of the Secretariat and the elite board members weren’t culturally on the same wavelength with members.

The ‘professionals’ who work in ‘development’ organisations in Uganda have studied or have been trained through a colonial-English-global-western education system, which does not easily, if at all, accommodate African cultures. It is clothed in cultural imperialism and teaches that the global-western way of doing things is the only right and progressive way.

African-Ugandans who went through this system, are taught that the culture of our people is backward; and that their value system and beliefs are superstition and witchcraft. It is, therefore, not surprising that Ugandan ‘professionals’ tend to ignore the norms and values of their people, but whom they claim to work for.

Lesson 3: Ugandan civil society actors are not homogeneous

It is not always the case that people from the same community (Ugandans) have the same level of beliefs in the norms and values that are ascribed to their African-Ugandan culture. There are Ugandans, for example, who have no problem with life insurance, most likely, because they have been exposed to the global-western culture and they understand how it works.

In this case, such Ugandans comfortable with global-western style life insurance schemes, are the minority. And so it is valid to surmise that the scheme failed because, it was designed within the ethos of popular practice in ‘development’ programming – based on the views of a small group within a community. And which is not representative of the values and norms of the larger community.

Recommended Additional Reading

• Maathai, Wangari. The Challenge for Africa – A New Vision. London: William Heinemann, 2009.
• Namboga, Jackie. “Minister wants burials held only on weekends.” New Vision, March 9, 2015.
• Thierry, Verhelst G. No life without roots (translations by Bob Cumming). London: Zed Books, 1990.