The most appropriate ethical approach to raise awareness and funds for development and the reasons why

The development can be described as the systematic and cumulative improvement (Hooper and Umansky, 2009, p. 44). The appropriate development is considered to bring about fair improvement in the improvement of a particular nation as well as the entire globe. With appropriate development every sector of an economy of a given nation is improved and sustained which in turn promotes the welfare of its residents. Currently, such development has to include environmental conservation considerations, cultural diversity and local people’s support for sustenance and all-round benefits (Lindahl, 2011, p. 22). Thus, development is evaluated on the basis of its effects rather than the parties behind it; the development is accepted and supported if its consequences are beneficial, otherwise it is rejected.

Since most development projects involve substantial amounts of money that cannot be recovered once spent and financial support is limited, care has to be taken when raising the project’s awareness and funds so as to ensure maximum funding and support throughout the life period of the development. The more benefits conceived by the parties involved, the more support and funding the development receives (Ciconte & Jacob, 2009, p. 66). On the other hand, the lesser the benefits conceived, the lower the support and funding. With other factors remaining constant, development awareness and funding are directly proportion to perceived benefits. Another important factor in project funding is the set of issues involving ethical implications in the financial management sector: conflicts of interests, compensation, accountability, financial integrity and regulation.

The issue of conflict of interest arises from the model of raising the money and the salary/wages paid to the people involved in collection of the funds. There is always strife whether to use a “market” model or a “not-for-profit” model in raising the awareness and funds (Forstorp, 2007, p. 292). Some people argue that raising money for development ought not to follow the market model because the model is exploitative whereas others claim that the “not-for-profit” model does not yield optimal funding. This results into a dilemma as to what model is “good” for creating awareness and funding development. For instance, should advertisement strategy, as that employed by businesses, be adopted or should the responsible team only rely on donations and grants?

Also, it is debatable how much the parties involved in the awareness and funding strategies should receive as payment for their services. Should the payment me a fixed sum of money, commission-based or not to be paid at all? If the funding strategy is borrowing, should interest be charged or not charged? All these alternatives lead to ethical dilemma as to the “good” mode is.

There are also fears of lack of integrity and accountability of the funds raised for development. The fears result from most unquantifiable aspects of development making it hard to determine the actual impact of the project and equating it to the money spent. In this way, it is hard to establish whether the funds raised were prudently spent or not.

Therefore, the best ethical approach to raising development awareness and funding is the virtue approach. Though not sufficient on its own just like any other approach, this approach identifies the virtues facilitating the realisation of specified goal, funds in this case; the barrier vices, misappropriation and corruption and the behaviour consistent with desired values. Thus, it will ensure integrity and the best balance between the activities/procedure for awareness creation and fund raising.


Ciconte, B. L., & Jacob, J. G. (2009). Fundraising basics: a complete guide. Sudbury, Mass, Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Forstorp, P. (2007). Fundraising discourse and the Commodification of the Other:Business Ethics. A European Review, 16(3), pp. 286-301.

Lindahl, W. E. (2011). Principles of Fundraising: Theories and Practice. [Jones & Bartlett Publishers].

Can’t decide? Try 500 words FREE OF CHARGE!