The globalized world benefits from direct acts of help because it is coming straight to the source. We would know who gave to where and it is easier to appreciate their helping this way. Indirect acts are harder to track who gave the donation. Thus it can go unappreciated easier.
Yes, it makes sense to determine specific areas in which to provide aid to various countries and regions. This approach is especially useful in curbing corruption. Once a need is identified, an organization or government in a position to help can assess what their budget will allow and help those in need as efficiently as possible. Specific and direct acts of help allow for the greatest accountability.
I believe the globalized world benefits more from direct acts of help rather than indirect acts of help. I believe indirect acts of help make it harder for a person to respond to in a socially acceptable way. I think direct acts are better because it gives people a chance to say thank you directly or otherwise show their gratitude.
I think that sometimes when there are direct acts of help, they often don't have the same consequences that we originally think they will. Indirct acts are better because they are orgnaic and they help the world come together in a more genuine way. It should be a natural process.
I think that indirect acts of help is what does more good for the world, because it shows that people are still good inside, and that they are able to help out others with out even thinking about it, and realizing that they just make a huge help to someone.