University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

An unlikely partnership: engaging diasporas as stakeholders to international development donors

(USC Thesis Other)

An unlikely partnership: engaging diasporas as stakeholders to international development donors

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Executive Summary Report
University of Southern California – School of Education
1 Copyright © 2023 L. Parent | USC Rossier School of Education

An Unlikely Partnership: Engaging
Diasporas As Stakeholders to
International Development Donors
Lovesun Parent

University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California

E-mail: lparent@usc.edu; dr.loveparent@gmail.com

Abstract
This dissertation explored the role diasporas traditionally played in development while assessing the lack of formal and direct
engagement of international development donors like the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), a
donor agency, with nontraditional partners such as diasporic groups as formal partners to achieve sustainable global
development results. Systemic discrimination in the humanitarian aid and international development industry perpetuates
hierarchical inequalities rooted in racism. This paper explored the gap in the partnership framework of international
development donors like USAID while examining how diasporas influence development of the Global South. This qualitative
study evaluated the organizational effects of diaspora partnership engagement. The study’s document analysis and interviews
with 10 development workers reveal performance gaps. Using Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analytic framework, the study
revealed gaps in policy, organizational barriers, and power dynamics limit engagement between donors and diasporas. The
finding also confirmed diasporas enrich the role of donors in their home countries as direct investors, philanthropists, and
social entrepreneurs. The study also revealed gaps in operationalizing policies, organizational and workforce barriers, and
significant equity and inclusion challenges that disincentivize USAID employees from successfully implementing new
partnership initiatives. The study offers a comprehensive implementation and evaluation plan based on the new world
Kirkpatrick model and evidence-supported recommendations.
Keywords: diaspora; transnationalism; home identity; international development; remittances; international development
partnerships; localization; decoloniality; racism; diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility

Problem of practice
Many international development programs seek to address
global challenges, from agriculture, education, and health to
economic growth, democracy, and governance. However,
although international development funding agencies
dedicate significant resources to tackle global development
challenges, many programs struggle to meet their goals.
Damoah and Kumi (2018) examined the increasing project
failure rate. Many reputable and experienced donors like the
World Bank, Asian Development Bank, and USAID have
not produced the desired project outcomes. One independent
research conducted by the World Bank discovered 39% of
projects failed (Chauvet et al., 2010). USAID’s Office of
Inspector General has conducted numerous reports
identifying several management issues that hinder
development.
The World Bank published data in 2020 revealed remittances
by the diaspora reached $702 billion, an increase from $689
billion in 2018 and $633 billion in 2017 (The World Bank,
2019). In addition, the World Bank (2021) anticipated the
global health crisis would directly affect remittances, with
recipient countries estimated to receive $553 billion in 2021
and $565 billion in 2022 in diaspora remittances. Global
remittances, however, are anticipated to reach $774 billion in
2022 and climb to $810.79 billion in 2023, far exceeding
these estimates.
However, X. Lin (2010) found the contributions of diaspora
remittances are short-term-oriented and fail to address the
Engaging Diasporas – USC Rossier School of Education Lovesun Parent
2

root causes of development challenges tackled by
governments and international donors. Budabin’s (2014)
study determined these diasporic groups separately represent
influential contributors to the development of their home
countries. Whether as investments or remittances, their
contributions, not leveraged by governments and
international donors, represent an untapped resource for
global development (Budabin, 2014). As the literature will
later showcase, diasporas are an untapped resource in
developing economies (Nkongolo-Bakenda & Chrysostome,
2013), and diaspora engagement is limited to remittance and
not leveraged to address key development outcomes
(Brinkerhoff, 2011; Nyberg-Sorensen et al., 2002).
Diasporas provide a safety net for developing countries, but
international development donors miss an opportunity to
engage with them as stakeholders (Rajak & Stirrat, 2011).
Diasporas can connect humanitarian relief and longer-term
development, which is essential to ensure a successful
development project (Ika et al., 2010). The international
development community is shifting its focus from technical
and professional aid toward localized aid. Diaspora groups
have a distinct advantage in this regard, as they can use their
transnational identities and close proximity to local
communities (Sundberg, 2019). Localization in donor
discourse encompasses practices that transfer power, channel
donor funds to local partners, recognize local expertise, and
support local initiatives (Sundberg, 2019). Although donors
explore different facets of localization, there is historical
documentation that diasporas have long played a
fundamental role in this process (Christian Aid, n.d.; Parrish
& Kattakuzhy, 2018; Wall & Hedlund, 2016). They have
taken part in various humanitarian crises and conflicts,
including the Russo-Ukrainian War, the Somali humanitarian
crisis, and the Darfuri conflict, through activism and policy
influence (Budabin, 2014; Nikolko, 2019; Olliff, 2018).
Context of study
This organizational study evaluates and recommends
solutions to expand partnerships with diaspora groups.
President John F. Kennedy established USAID through the
Foreign Assistance Act, assigning the Agency a mandate to
administer economic assistance programs. With the directive
to support U.S. foreign policy, USAID leads the U.S.
government’s international development and disaster
assistance via partnerships and investments that “save lives,
reduce poverty, strengthen democratic governance, and help
people emerge from humanitarian crises and progress beyond
assistance” (USAID, 2021, para. 1). The Agency’s ultimate
objective is to assist partners in achieving self-reliance and
building their capacity to lead their own development
journeys.
USAID (2016) recognized more than a fifth of the U.S.
population is first– or second–generation diasporas. Nearly
14% of the U.S. population is diaspora (Budiman et al.,
2020). In 2016, the Agency developed research on diaspora
engagement, where it also recognized “diaspora skills,
knowledge, market access, and familiarity with local culture
and language can be deployed in different forms to impact
development” (USAID, 2016, p. 3). USAID has a track
record of supporting diaspora initiatives in countries that
align with its development goals. However, the majority of
such efforts center around economic growth, particularly in
entrepreneurship, investment, and the utilization of diaspora
capital. The Agency boasted 47% of its diaspora engagement
is concentrated predominantly on investments that support
economic growth in developing countries. In comparison,
only 22% have focused on volunteerism, tapping into the
diaspora’s knowledge, skills, and expertise (USAID, 2016).
Across the years, USAID has also developed a variety of
resources including (a) Diaspora Toolkit: Partnering With
USAID, (b) Diaspora Infographic, (c) USAID and Diaspora:
Partners in Development Framework, and (d) Diaspora
Factsheet: An Overview of the Agency’s Diaspora
Engagement Work. USAID has also designed a few
mechanisms, such as the African Diaspora Marketplace and
MicroMentor, focused on providing funding and mentorship
to entrepreneurs. USAID also supports two investment
platforms, the India Investment Initiative (III) and Raíces,
which empowers diasporas in India and Latin America.
Lastly, Homestrings is a USAID-funded online investment
and social media platform that channels diasporic capital
(USAID, 2020).
Despite these initiatives, USAID has been unable to sustain
or expand diaspora partnerships. Most of the diaspora efforts
undertaken by the Agency date back to 2016–2017,
demonstrating USAID’s inability to sustain diasporic
engagement. Moreover, most recent partnership reports
indicated the initiative’s launch did not reach its goal. Most
investments focus on the economic growth sector, with little
to none in the health, education, and governance sectors.
Importance of study
X. Lin (2010) found the contributions of diaspora
remittances are short term oriented and fail to address the
root causes of development challenges tackled by
governments and international donors. Budabin’s (2014)
study determined these diasporic groups separately represent
influential contributors to the development of their home
countries. Whether as investments or remittances, their
contributions, not leveraged by governments and
international donors, represent an untapped resource in
international development (Budabin, 2014). This problem of
practice assessed the lack of formal and direct engagement of
Engaging Diasporas – USC Rossier School of Education Lovesun Parent
3

international donors with diasporas as partners to achieve
sustainable results in international development. The
research explored USAID’s partnership framework and
analyzed gaps in their engagement with diaspora partners.
Theoretical Framework and Methodology
This study applied a qualitative methodology using (a)
interviews, (b) assumed KMO influences, and (c) document
analyses to understand diaspora engagement in international
development. The researcher used a semistructured
qualitative study. The researcher carefully crafted the
interviews to explore thoroughly how donors are structured
organizationally and their level of partnership involvement.
For Method 1, the target population is 10 humanitarian
workers trained to respond to various international crises and
have the mandate to diversify the Agency’s partner base. The
target population has direct experience engaging multiple
partners, including nontraditional partners. They have
worked under multiple partnership policy initiatives.
The study reviewed and analyzed relevant reports and
literature, including assessing the policies and strategies of
countries with large migration and diaspora populations,
such as the Philippines, Haiti, and Nigeria. During the 16-
week analysis, the researcher analyzed documents related to
donor organizations engaging diasporas as stakeholders. The
researcher developed a system for identifying, collecting, and
categorizing over 80 documents, policies, strategies, reports,
and executive orders in accordance with the research
questions. Furthermore, the researcher integrated pertinent
literature into Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis
framework to provide a comprehensive understanding of the
organizational influences that drive or hinder diaspora
engagement. Interview data were analyzed to validate or
invalidate assumed influences. The study employed the new
world Kirkpatrick model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016),
a comprehensive implementation and evaluation plan.
The framework illustrated in Figure 2 influenced the study’s
approach to exploring partnerships in international
development with diasporas as stakeholders and whether
such partnerships are encouraged or discouraged. Developing
this conceptual framework, the researcher drew upon a
variety of theoretical perspectives, empirical studies, and
personal experiences. The data were identified, collected, and
analyzed using the conceptual framework.
Figure 2
Conceptual Framework: Engaging Diasporas as
Stakeholders

Note. Figure created based on information compiled from the
following references: Clark & Estes (2008); Bolman & Deal
(2008); Delgado & Stefancic (2013); Fanon (1966); Kothari
(2006); Said (1987); Solorzano & Yosso (2000); Vygotsky
(1978); and Young (2003).
Research questions
The following questions will guide the research into
evaluating and recommending solutions to expanding
partnerships with diaspora groups:
1. How do international donors like USAID engage
the diaspora?
2. How do diaspora groups, networks, or coalitions
enhance the role of international development
donors?
3. How are USAID employees incentivized to
implement new partnership strategies and policies?
Findings
Rather than serving as a critique of development diplomacy
or an admonishment of foreign aid, this research served as a
call to action for development practitioners seeking to
strengthen donor accountability, maximize impact, and
optimize resources through inclusive partnerships. The
purpose of this study was to explore the gap in the
partnership framework of international development donors
like USAID while examining the various ways diasporas
influence the development of their home country. This
research used postcolonial theory and CRT to analyze
partnerships between diasporas and international
development donors. These are merely frames for
investigating how power operates within institutions.
Applying this lens to foreign assistance and partnership
engagement can provide some insight into the power
dynamics that govern global development aid.
Engaging Diasporas – USC Rossier School of Education Lovesun Parent
4

Results in Parts 1 and 2 highlight the gap in the partnership
framework of international development donors, specifically
USAID. Participant interviews and document analysis show
the need to shift power dynamics in international
development to engage diasporas as key stakeholders. The
interdependence of development, defense, and diplomacy
continues to maintain neocolonial power structures. Western
countries like the United States employ development
assistance to maintain a geopolitical presence in the Global
South. It is thus not a coincidence that USAID systematically
awards contracts and grants to the same U.S.-based
companies. The findings recognize the necessity to
restructure the current organizational model that revolves
around return on investment on partnering with traditional
U.S.-based development partners.
The document analysis shows a gap in USAID’s complex
organizational structure, knowledge management systems,
and knowledge transfer between organizational units or
employees (Leonardi, 2014). Knowledge donation refers to
employees consulting, communicating with, and learning
from each other through knowledge collection (Razmerita et
al., 2016). The organization’s KMS does not promote a space
for development practitioners to collect and donate
knowledge associated with diaspora engagement. The
document analysis only highlighted external resources for
partners. In 2010, USAID developed an Action Plan for
Diaspora Engagement that focused on areas such as
explaining U.S. foreign policy to diaspora members,
including diaspora members in the development of the
foreign policy, and leveraging diasporas as human capital
(USAID, 2010). After the Agency developed the Action
Plan, a Diaspora Engagement Working Group supervised
activities related to engaging with the diaspora. A key
objective of the Action Plan was to enhance the coordination
of diaspora involvement in USAID’s toolkit. This also
involved creating a training program for both new and
current employees. However, the document analysis showed
the organization did not develop or implement the training
program. The duration of the working group’s activity
remains uncertain, and its dissolution remains unclear.
Nonetheless, it is clear it only lasted for a brief period.
The data showed although the organizational mission
promotes inclusive partnership, there is a gap between
embedded culture and manifested climate. The findings
suggest USAID’s climate is lacking in engaging diasporas as
an organizational priority. The document and interview
analysis indicates the organization lacked concrete
partnership engagement training, emphasis on increasing
diaspora relationships, actual discussion, or agenda setting on
diaspora engagement. The findings indicate although most
participants feel USAID has committed partnerships
advocates and leaders, these administrators and directors
routinely focus on other goals at the expense of diaspora
participation.
The data corroborated the need for USAID to focus on more
inclusive leadership to promote diverse partnerships and
diaspora engagement. Participants reported a lack of
leadership priority in this area, as there is little intentionality
linked to inclusive diaspora engagement. Based on the data
participants provided, it is evident that although the
organization values partnerships, its climate does not
prioritize them as a key organizational goal. This assertion
supports the working theory of the conceptual framework.
The lack of emphasis on diaspora integration within key
partnership policies and initiatives often results in a limited
focus on the organizational climate that prioritizes diaspora
integration. The lack of established structures, protocols, and
policies targeting improved diaspora engagement by the
organization shows USAID’s senior leadership may not
perceive this issue as an organizational imperative.
Furthermore, participants cited the limited number of
ethnically and racially diverse workers in leadership
positions, linking the gap to a perceived incapacity to engage
in inclusive partnerships. International development agencies
must prioritize inclusion of individuals from diverse
backgrounds in their efforts.
Recommendations
Successful localization and decolonization models exist. A
number of USAID-funded projects have achieved their
objectives successfully at a fraction of the cost. The Agency,
for example, cut its school building costs in Senegal by 50%
by switching from a traditional international implementation
firm to a fixed-price reimbursement model with the local
government (Dunning, 2013). After reviewing the literature
and data, the researchers developed a strategy to assess
which approach was more cost-effective. The Agency’s
efforts must increase resources available to local, national,
and diaspora actors. The study’s recommendations strongly
advocate for increasing the organization’s localization and
decolonization efforts to remove current obstacles to
partnership development and diaspora engagement.
In the international development sector, solution-oriented
approaches are effective tools for identifying positive
outcomes in the face of complex and challenging issues (A.
Banerjee & Duflo, 2011; Caniglia et al., 2017; Culotta et al.,
2016; Luederitz et al., 2017). Emphasizing problem solving
with a solution-oriented mindset enables the transformation
of ideas into actionable steps, leading to tangible impact.
With this perspective in mind, the researcher adopts the
notion of “solutions” as a pivotal discussion point to
introduce viable ways of addressing the gaps in donor
engagement with the diaspora.
Engaging Diasporas – USC Rossier School of Education Lovesun Parent
5

Localization and decolonization entail making fundamental
changes in how international cooperation operates. There is
no denying the complexity of each approach, but one of the
key components is flexible and predictable funding that
targets local actors and diaspora alike. Instead of focusing
exclusively on service outcomes provided by local partners,
donors must strengthen local actors and processes. There
needs to be thorough engagement between donors and local
actors to allow the local leadership to flourish and
international actors to play an allyship role. In comparing all
three approaches, decolonization efforts with diaspora
engagement would be the most cost-effective initiative. This
approach would save the USG and U.S. taxpayers up to 50%
of the current USAID budget while increasing project
success to 85%.
Conclusion
This study explored the role diasporas play in the
development and lack of engagement of international
development donors. The researcher focused on USAID to
assess the gap in its partnership framework for engaging
different diaspora communities. The qualitative study
employed Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis model to
evaluate the organizational effects of diaspora partnership
engagement. Interviews and document analysis demonstrated
organizational barriers to alignment between organizational
culture, work for DEIA practices, diversity leadership, and
inclusive partnerships. It is imperative for USAID to change
its partnership framework, which currently seeks to maintain
neocolonial power structures as the United States uses
development assistance to maintain a geopolitical presence in
the Global South.
The findings indicated a gap in the organization’s intricate
organizational structure, KMS knowledge transfer between
employees and departments. USAID’s KMS fails to
encourage a space for improving and transferring knowledge
associated with inclusive diaspora engagement. There is also
a gap between USAID’s embedded culture and manifested
climate, evident in the lack of concrete partnership
engagement, strategic plan, and organizational priority. It is
thus pertinent for USAID to adopt a variety of procedures
and best practices to promote increased inclusive diaspora
engagement and partnerships, including implementing
localization and decolonization models and integrating
stakeholder and organizational SMART Goals.
References
Asquith, P., & Opoku-Owusu, S. (2020). Diaspora
investment to help achieve the SDGs in Africa:
Prospects and trends. In A. Maček (Ed.), Foreign
direct investment perspective through foreign direct
divestment. IntechOpen.
https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.93129
Banerjee, A., & Duflo, E. (2011). Poor economics: A radical
rethinking of the way to fight global poverty.
PublicAffairs.
Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing
organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadersh
ip
(4th
ed.). Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Brinkerhoff, J. (2011). David and Goliath: Diaspora
organizations as partners in the development
industry. Public Administration and
Development, 31(1), 37–49.
https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.587
Budabin, A. (2014). Diasporas as development partners for
peace? The alliance between the Darfuri diaspora
and the Save Darfur Coalition. Third World
Quarterly, 35(1), 163–180.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2014.868996
Caniglia, G., Schäpke, N., Lang, D. J., Abson, D. J.,
Luederitz, C., Wiek, A., & von Wehrden, H. (2017).
Experiments and evidence in sustainability science:
A typology. Journal of Cleaner Production, 169,
39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.05.164
Chauvet, L., Collier, P., & Duponchel, M. (2010). What
explains aid project success in post-conflict
situations? PsycEXTRA Dataset.
https://doi.org/10.1037/e503962013-001
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into
results: A guide to selecting the right performance
solutions. Information Age Publishing.
Culotta, D., Wiek, A., & Forrest, N. (2016). Selecting and
coordinating local and regional climate change
interventions. Environment and Planning C:
Government and Policy, 34(7), 1241–1266.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774X15607475
Damoah, I., & Kumi, D. (2018). Causes of government
construction projects failure in an emerging
economy: Evidence from Ghana. International
Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 11(3),
558–582. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMPB-04-2017-
0042
Delgado, R., Stefancic, J., & Harris, A. (2017). Critical race
theory (3rd ed.): An introduction (Vol. 20). NYU
Press. https://doi.org/10.18574/9781479851393
Dunning, C. (2013, November 4). Is local spending better?
The controversy over USAID procurement reform.
Center for American Progress.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/is-local-
spending-better/
Fanon, F. (1968). The wretched of the earth. Grove Press.
Ika, L. A., Diallo, A., & Thuillier, D. (2010). Project
management in the international development
industry. International Journal of Managing
Projects in Business, 3(1), 61–93.
https://doi.org/10.1108/17538371011014035
Kothari, U. (2006). Critiquing ‘race’ and racism in
development discourse and practice. Progress in
Development Studies., 6(1), 1–7.
Engaging Diasporas – USC Rossier School of Education Lovesun Parent
6

https://doi.org/10.1191/1464993406ps123ed
Leonardi, P. M. (2014). Social media, knowledge sharing,
and innovation: Toward a theory of communication
visibility. Information Systems Research, 25(4),
796–816. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.2014.0536
Lin, X. (2010). The diaspora solution to innovation capacity
development: Immigrant entrepreneurs in the
contemporary world. Thunderbird International
Business Review, 52(2), 123–136.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.20319
Luederitz, C., Schäpke, N., Wiek, A., Lang, D. J., Bergmann,
M., Bos, J. J., Burch, S., Davies, A., Evans, J.,
König, A., Farrelly, M. A., Forrest, N.,
Frantzeskaki, N., Gibson, R. B., Kay, B., Loorbach,
D., McCormick, K., Parodi, O., Rauschmayer, F.,
… Westley, F. R. (2017). Learning through
evaluation–A tentative evaluative scheme for
sustainability transition experiments. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 169, 61–76.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.005
Nikolko, M. (2019). Diaspora mobilization and the Ukraine
crisis: old traumas and new strategies. Ethnic and
Racial Studies, 42(11), 1870–1889.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2019.1569703

Nkongolo-Bakenda, J., & Chrysostome, E. (2013). Engaging
diasporas as international entrepreneurs in
developing countries: In search of determinants.
Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 11(1),
30–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-012-0098-1
Nyberg-Sorensen, N., Hear, N., & Engberg-Pedersen, P.
(2002). The migration-development nexus: evidence
and policy options. International Migration, 40(5),
49–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2435.00211

Olliff, L. (2018). From resettled refugees to humanitarian
actors: Refugee diaspora organizations and
everyday humanitarianism. New Political Science,
40(4), 658–674.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07393148.2018.1528059
Parrish, C., & Kattakuzhy, A. (2018, March). Money Talks:
A synthesis report assessing humanitarian funding
flows to local actors in Bangladesh and Uganda.
Oxfam digital repository.
https://doi.org/10.21201/2017.2135
Rajak, D., & Stirrat, J. (2011). Parochial cosmopolitanism
and the power of nostalgia. Adventures in Aidland:
The Anthropology of Professionals in International
Development, 6, 161–176.
https://doi.org/10.1515/9780857451118-009
Razmerita, L., Kirchner, K., & Nielsen, P. (2016). What
factors influence knowledge sharing in
organizations? A social dilemma perspective of
social media communication. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 20(6), 1225–1246.
https://doi.org/10.1108/jkm-03-2016-0112
Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. Pantheon Books.
Solorzano, D., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical race
theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial
climate: The experiences of African American
college students. The Journal of Negro Education,
69(1/2), 60–73.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2696265
Sundberg, M. (2019). National staff in public foreign aid:
Aid localization in practice. Human Organization,
78(3), 253–263. https://doi.org/10.17730/0018-
7259.78.3.253
U.S. Agency for International Development. (2010).
Diaspora action plan. Washington, DC.
Unpublished.
U.S. Agency for International Development. (2016,
October). USAID and Diaspora: Partners in
development.
https://www.usaid.gov/documents/15396/diaspora-
engagement-usaid-partners-development
U.S. Agency for International Development. (2019, April).
Agency Financial Report Fiscal Year 2020.
www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USAI
D_FY2020_AFR-508.pdf
U.S. Agency for International Development. (2020).
Transformation at USAID: What we do.
https://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/transformation-
at-usaid
U.S. Agency for International Development. (2021). New
partnerships initiative. https://www.usaid.gov/npi
U.S. Agency for International Development. (2022). Center
for transformational partnerships diaspora
engagement: USAID partners with diasporas to
grow development impact. USAID. https://2017-
2020.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/15396/
CTP_FactSheet_Diaspora%20%282%29.pdf
Wall, I., & Hedlund, K. (2016). Localisation and locally-led
crisis response: A literature review. Local to Global
Protection (L2 GB). Swiss Agency for Development
and Cooperation. https://www.local2global.info/wp-
content/uploads/L2GP_SDC_Lit_Review_LocallyL
ed_June_2016_final.pdf
The World Bank. (2019, April 8). Record high remittances
sent globally in 2018 [Press
release]. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-
release/2019/04/08/record-high-remittances-sent-
globally-in-2018
The World Bank. (2021, May 12). Defying predictions,
remittance flows remain strong during COVID-19
crisis [Press release].
https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-
release/2021/05/12/defying-predictions-remittance-
flows-remain-strong-during-covid-19-crisis
Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: The
development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard University Press.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

An unlikely partnership: engaging diasporas as stakeholders to international development donors

Conceptually similar

PDF

An unlikely partnership: engaging diasporas as stakeholders to international development donors

PDF

Power-sharing in co-constructed community-school partnerships: examining values, opportunities, and barriers around community engagement in New York City school leadership teams

PDF

Examining the pandemic’s impact on remote worker wellness in community colleges: organizational lessons and strategies

PDF

Partnerships and nonprofit leadership: the influence of nonprofit managers on community partnerships

PDF

Performance management in government: the importance of goal clarity

PDF

Online graduate-level student learning and engagement: developing critical competencies for future leadership roles: an evaluation study

PDF

Examining teachers’ perceptions of diversity, equity, and inclusion professional development

PDF

Perceptions of professional development from the lens of the global teacher in a rapidly evolving, linguistically diverse instructional environment

PDF

Examining the lack of equity in leadership opportunities for underrepresented employees in the pharmaceutical industry

PDF

Diversity management in local government: a gap analysis

PDF

Supporting the marching arts: the salience of parent volunteer booster training

PDF

The underrepresentation of Black women general officers in a U.S. military reserve component

PDF

K-12 dress codes and gender equity: an examination of policy and practice of dress code implementation

PDF

Efficacy of non-formal education programs in educational outcomes of marginalized Filipino children: an evaluation study

PDF

Development of employee well-being initiatives to improve engagement and performance: an innovative study

PDF

Amplifying the counter-narratives of first-generation college graduates of color as they navigate the journey toward decent work

PDF

Diversity initiatives in a California independent school: from plans to reality

PDF

Supporting emergent bilinguals: implementation of SIOP and professional development practices

PDF

Examining donor engagement strategies: an exploratory study of the impact of performance gaps on donor retention and cultivation within higher education development offices

PDF

Multi-tiered system of support as the overarching umbrella: an improvement model using KMO gap analysis to address the problem of school districts struggling to implement MTSS

Asset Metadata

Creator Parent, Lovesun (author)

Core Title An unlikely partnership: engaging diasporas as stakeholders to international development donors

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2023-12

Publication Date 09/13/2023

Defense Date 07/07/2023

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag and accessibility,decoloniality,diaspora,diversity,equity,home identity,inclusion,international development,international development partnerships,localization,OAI-PMH Harvest,Racism,remittances,transnationalism

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Brady, Melanie (committee chair), Green, Alan (committee chair), Datta, Monique (committee member)

Creator Email dr.loveparent@gmail.com,lparent@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113340427

Unique identifier UC113340427

Identifier etd-ParentLove-12379-1.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-ParentLove-12379-1.pdf

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Parent, Lovesun

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20230913-usctheses-batch-1097 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu