Locally.
While Mary can and does put focus on the general issues from a distance, the local effects may be limited.
It very logic: A visiting VIP from a donor country visits Burkina Faso and wish to see what's being done. So projects have to be initiated and they have to show some results - that the visiting dignitary (in this case Mary) can see - otherwise there may be less future donations and investments, which is what the country so desperately needs.
When no VIP's come visiting, there may be a lesser incentive to do something concrete, especially where it really matters.
And on that track a professor in African studies in DK criticized Mary for going to Burkina Faso in BT (yesterday I think), pointing out that her visit really made very little difference locally.
In a sense he is right of course. Mary's visit in itself only truly matters to those who meet and see her - for the rest of the women in Burkina Faso there will be no difference to speak of.
However, and that's what is so important about royals - who represent a nation in contrast to celebs who at best represent an organization - is that they physically and verbally can put focus on something specific. In this case the really poor conditions of women in Burkina Faso. Because to be honest, how many reading about Mary here even know where Burkina Faso is without looking at a globe?
And how many here in DK even care one bit?
As I see it the professor represent the view you often see in regards to royals: That they make very little difference locally, so why go there?
It's a sentiment I do not share: I believe it's better to do something, even very little, than doing nothing.
And that seems to be Mary's intention in regards to Burkina Faso, albeit from a distance, since going there is getting more and more problematic.