system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
[Economics] Do internationally donated clothes (eg to Africa) have a detrimental effect on the receiver's economy?

I once read an argument that the very common practice of donating clothes to Africa have a had a highly negative effect there as the flood of almost free foreign clothes have destroyed, or at least severely hampered, the native textile industries and created a damaging economic dependence on foreign charity. Furthermore, it was noted that the clothes sent over tend to come from Europe and North America, which often have very different climates and clothing than the places they are sent. Is this accurate?

(I think I read this in Paul Theroux's *Dark Star Safari*, so I am using a grain of salt)
gpt
It depends on whether or not they act as a substitution for local producers' goods. There is a case study (will look for a citation at some point) where a large volume of cheap tee shirts were donated to an East African country. The unintended consequence was that local manufacturers experienced a sharp decline in demand, causing job loss and business closures.

A far better approach is to donate by purchasing orders of clothing locally for donation with foreign capital, which acts both to clothe people and stimulate the local economy.

In addition, there is a well-known phenomenon in the aid industry that donations of discretionary goods are less valued than subsidisation of goods. For example, houses in South Africa provided to township dwellers living in informal dwellings like shacks free of charge are typically in far worse condition that houses provided for small costs/low interest loans.

So if you're giving absolute basic necessities (eg shoes, warm clothes in cold environments, all good, but if you're giving discretionary goods, this effect may reduce their functional lifespan).