Monday, July 23, 2012
Capability for self-reliance
Being food insecure is a terrible thing. So is financial insecurity, energy insecurity and water insecurity. Sad but true, many families, communities and countries are faced with continued or emerging insecurity in the supply of water, energy, and food. Self-reliance as the capacity to rely on own capabilities to navigate one’s own affairs may not sound as exciting as double digit growth but the concept deserves a central place in the international development cooperation.
Self-reliant individuals, organizations and societies develop strategies and implement activities to realize their long-term vision. Self-reliant actors employ technical, social and organizational skills to keep themselves afloat, anticipate and adapt to changing environments and show resilience in the face of adversity. Absence of the capacity for self-reliance implies earlier or later insecurity with possible dire consequences.
In fact, truly self-sufficient and resource secure societies are hard to find. Apart from perhaps a small group of eskimos in Greenland or an indigenous community in the Amazone that could be qualified ‘self-sufficient’, people are highly interconnected and mutually dependent through trade and other forms of cooperation. Producers need consumers, creditors need debtors and exporters cannot fare without importers.
New knowledge and skills can propel self-reliance to a higher level. It worked like this since the ancient domestication of crops and animals and continues today with the development the latest technologies. Expanding capacities is as critical to technical innovation as to deep organizational and societal transformations.
Faces of self-reliance
In fact, truly self-sufficient and resource secure societies are hard to find. Apart from perhaps a small group of eskimos in Greenland or an indigenous community in the Amazone that could be qualified ‘self-sufficient’, people are highly interconnected and mutually dependent through trade and other forms of cooperation. Producers need consumers, creditors need debtors and exporters cannot fare without importers.
New knowledge and skills can propel self-reliance to a higher level. It worked like this since the ancient domestication of crops and animals and continues today with the development the latest technologies. Expanding capacities is as critical to technical innovation as to deep organizational and societal transformations.
Faces of self-reliance
In the early nineties, drought prone communities of Aiquile in Bolivia merely survived on rain-fed agriculture. The strength of the peasants laid in their syndicalist organization with an economic arm –a self-declared social enterprise- CORACA. The organization offered its members a range of trainings in political awareness and agriculture while commercializing agricultural products to become financially independent.
CORACA was well-known for its extraordinary drive for self-determination and self-reliance. Don German, its president, dreamt of self-sustained homesteads as a reliable livelihood source for the peasant communities. He was fascinated by the concept of ‘Perma Culture’. It is about a multi-storied orchard with a diverse mix of complementary crops and small animals producing in a sustainable manner. The production system optimally harnesses the natural resources: sun, water, nutrients throughout the seasons while protecting the soil against erosion.
Supported by international financial and technical cooperation CORACA was able to build individual and collective rainwater harvesting ponds for many families. The pond technology -basically an improved form of a locally existing practice- allowed the production of some cash-crops and store, even in dry years, water to secure a minimum food production.
It is December 2011. Cecilia, a member of the Twa minority, cell phone in the hand, proudly talks about her business of making briquettes at the launch of an entrepreneurship initiative in Rwanda. She makes 30.000 Rwandese francs (50 USD) per month, enough to lift her out a beggar past. She buys her own clothes and sends her children to school. She now feels part of the society and is confident to enter a bar for a soft drink. She thanks the country and the people for having created the
opportunities for her to stand alone and live a decent and dignified life.
On another level countries and power-blocks are fighting multiple resource insecurities. The United States explores alternative options to provide energy security while the Middle East hugely invests in pursuit of water and food security. Many African governments hope the current growth spurt finally will allow an escape from financial dependence from the donor community.
Beyond the fish and the fishing rod
International development cooperation can play varying roles to support Cecilia, CORACA and countries in their quest for self-reliance. They have skills and knowledge that might turn out essential for others.
CORACA was well-known for its extraordinary drive for self-determination and self-reliance. Don German, its president, dreamt of self-sustained homesteads as a reliable livelihood source for the peasant communities. He was fascinated by the concept of ‘Perma Culture’. It is about a multi-storied orchard with a diverse mix of complementary crops and small animals producing in a sustainable manner. The production system optimally harnesses the natural resources: sun, water, nutrients throughout the seasons while protecting the soil against erosion.
Supported by international financial and technical cooperation CORACA was able to build individual and collective rainwater harvesting ponds for many families. The pond technology -basically an improved form of a locally existing practice- allowed the production of some cash-crops and store, even in dry years, water to secure a minimum food production.
It is December 2011. Cecilia, a member of the Twa minority, cell phone in the hand, proudly talks about her business of making briquettes at the launch of an entrepreneurship initiative in Rwanda. She makes 30.000 Rwandese francs (50 USD) per month, enough to lift her out a beggar past. She buys her own clothes and sends her children to school. She now feels part of the society and is confident to enter a bar for a soft drink. She thanks the country and the people for having created the
opportunities for her to stand alone and live a decent and dignified life.
On another level countries and power-blocks are fighting multiple resource insecurities. The United States explores alternative options to provide energy security while the Middle East hugely invests in pursuit of water and food security. Many African governments hope the current growth spurt finally will allow an escape from financial dependence from the donor community.
Beyond the fish and the fishing rod
International development cooperation can play varying roles to support Cecilia, CORACA and countries in their quest for self-reliance. They have skills and knowledge that might turn out essential for others.
We have learned that the essence of development cooperation is closer to nurturing home-grown capacities than anything else. Capacity development is not about the fish or about the fishing rod-to paraphrase the popular fish metaphor. Capacity development is about the combination of social and technical capacities that allow people to fish, hunt or cultivate their own food in a durable way.
‘Helping people help themselves’ or in other words increasing people’s ability for self-help might sound a bit old fashioned but has recently made it to a leading motto of the Dutch development cooperation. It builds on the notion that capacities developed in a specific context sometimes bear relevance for people elsewhere. Well, centuries of “polder” life behind the Dutch dikes has rendered some useful lessons for Katrina stricken New Orleans. And success of the stamp-size low-lands in
leading Europe towards food security following WWII and as a top agricultural exporter might hint to a story of inventiveness and built up expertise. In short, experiences from anywhere can inspire and serve as an example for local solutions everywhere if you take into account steps of adaptation and
internalization.
New capacities are acquired through a gradual learning process. External agents can only do so much through accompanying role or as a catalyst by being a coach, teacher, broker, facilitator, lender and/or partner. Unfortunately, capacity development processes are often slow and complex, while results and impact are difficult to measure. Randomized Control Trials (Banerjee & Duflo; 2011) combined with comprehensive life stories might help to clarify that picture.
Mainstreaming self-reliance
Over the last two decades Don German’s vision about durable self-reliance of a peasant community has become mainstream in the development discourse. Growing scarcity has finally put sustainability on top of agendas of businesses as well as governments. There is now consensus between civil society organizations, governments and businesses about the need for a new development equation with more social and environmental factors. It is now also understood that durable self-reliance is
not in the least about locking-in safety valves and floodgates to protect against contagion of systemic risks from water to energy or from finance to food and vice versa.
While overhauling international development cooperation we should keep in mind its function of being a public hub for sharing knowledge and skills for advancing self-reliance of individuals, organizations, and countries and ultimately the global society.
What can be a better gift in life than professional support to develop ones capacities for lasting access to vital resources as water, food, energy and finance?
‘Helping people help themselves’ or in other words increasing people’s ability for self-help might sound a bit old fashioned but has recently made it to a leading motto of the Dutch development cooperation. It builds on the notion that capacities developed in a specific context sometimes bear relevance for people elsewhere. Well, centuries of “polder” life behind the Dutch dikes has rendered some useful lessons for Katrina stricken New Orleans. And success of the stamp-size low-lands in
leading Europe towards food security following WWII and as a top agricultural exporter might hint to a story of inventiveness and built up expertise. In short, experiences from anywhere can inspire and serve as an example for local solutions everywhere if you take into account steps of adaptation and
internalization.
New capacities are acquired through a gradual learning process. External agents can only do so much through accompanying role or as a catalyst by being a coach, teacher, broker, facilitator, lender and/or partner. Unfortunately, capacity development processes are often slow and complex, while results and impact are difficult to measure. Randomized Control Trials (Banerjee & Duflo; 2011) combined with comprehensive life stories might help to clarify that picture.
Mainstreaming self-reliance
Over the last two decades Don German’s vision about durable self-reliance of a peasant community has become mainstream in the development discourse. Growing scarcity has finally put sustainability on top of agendas of businesses as well as governments. There is now consensus between civil society organizations, governments and businesses about the need for a new development equation with more social and environmental factors. It is now also understood that durable self-reliance is
not in the least about locking-in safety valves and floodgates to protect against contagion of systemic risks from water to energy or from finance to food and vice versa.
While overhauling international development cooperation we should keep in mind its function of being a public hub for sharing knowledge and skills for advancing self-reliance of individuals, organizations, and countries and ultimately the global society.
What can be a better gift in life than professional support to develop ones capacities for lasting access to vital resources as water, food, energy and finance?
Monday, April 2, 2012
Development doodles
Is development work the panacea for the poverty prevalent in the society? When we talk of development the first thing that comes in mind is projects, activities and we assume that doing all these we liberate people from the cultches of poverty. The documents like logframe, design, programme theory, Theory of change (the latest fad) takes over everything. Yes all these are very important. We do need clear goals, objectives, indicators to measure. We have been doing these since the day some one in some corner of the world dreamt of addressing poverty. But still the poverty level is not decreasing the way it should be. There is diminishing returns on the investment we made in alleviating poverty. Why?
Today in one of my offices in Jharkhand I was talking with the staff from the field. The staff started a litany of good activities that are going on in the communities from the awareness programme to the check dam addressing food security to women empowerment. At last he asked me a question, amidst all our activities we still could not bring the real change in the people. The community people are still divided on the basis of caste, gender. The children from two different communities do not take part with equal enthusiasm in the same activity.
On probing more on the issue we found:
1.Development is not about resources alone, it is more than that. In our development work we have started giving priority to the the visible change only. Eg agriculture productivity increased. we spend lot of resources in awareness generation for immunization but still children are not immunized fully. It is not because govt do not have supply nor mothers are not willing to bring their children for the vaccination. I think it is because we have failed to understand people, their belief and world view. Without understanding people's world view we have implemented so many activities and they have failed to yield better results. So the bottom line is UNDERSTAND PEOPLE'S WORLD VIEW.
2.Development is not about construction toilet, roads alone. It is about the relationship with the people. The lens that community are receipients, they do not know is fatally proven wrong. With this lens we implement activities but fail to address the change issue which is resided in the relationship. People are happy to have tubewell being constructed but once you are out of the place the divide due to caste, race, status which had appeared to vanish again resurfaces. The gap I see is lack of touch with the common masses. The influence can take place only when we communicate with people, build relationship with them, sit with them, think with them, walk along with them. In earlier days we used to attend village meeting ourselves but now it has been outsourced to volunteers. Because of this the activities of the village depends on the idea the volunteer have and as per his/her interest. We do not know community people, their issues first hand. we hardly listen to them. They are still the receipients and I am the giver. Bottom line then is DO NOT OUTSOURCE RELATIONSHIP.
.(Unedited: Random thoughts; you might disagree with this)
Today in one of my offices in Jharkhand I was talking with the staff from the field. The staff started a litany of good activities that are going on in the communities from the awareness programme to the check dam addressing food security to women empowerment. At last he asked me a question, amidst all our activities we still could not bring the real change in the people. The community people are still divided on the basis of caste, gender. The children from two different communities do not take part with equal enthusiasm in the same activity.
On probing more on the issue we found:
1.Development is not about resources alone, it is more than that. In our development work we have started giving priority to the the visible change only. Eg agriculture productivity increased. we spend lot of resources in awareness generation for immunization but still children are not immunized fully. It is not because govt do not have supply nor mothers are not willing to bring their children for the vaccination. I think it is because we have failed to understand people, their belief and world view. Without understanding people's world view we have implemented so many activities and they have failed to yield better results. So the bottom line is UNDERSTAND PEOPLE'S WORLD VIEW.
2.Development is not about construction toilet, roads alone. It is about the relationship with the people. The lens that community are receipients, they do not know is fatally proven wrong. With this lens we implement activities but fail to address the change issue which is resided in the relationship. People are happy to have tubewell being constructed but once you are out of the place the divide due to caste, race, status which had appeared to vanish again resurfaces. The gap I see is lack of touch with the common masses. The influence can take place only when we communicate with people, build relationship with them, sit with them, think with them, walk along with them. In earlier days we used to attend village meeting ourselves but now it has been outsourced to volunteers. Because of this the activities of the village depends on the idea the volunteer have and as per his/her interest. We do not know community people, their issues first hand. we hardly listen to them. They are still the receipients and I am the giver. Bottom line then is DO NOT OUTSOURCE RELATIONSHIP.
.(Unedited: Random thoughts; you might disagree with this)
Evaluation Space: Reconstruction of Program Logic as an Essential Co...
Reconstruction of program logic is development of a comprehensive chain of reasoning that links investments into a program with the program results by piecing together bits of evidence collected in the course of program evaluation.
In the real world logic of programs under evaluation is not always clear and consistent. According to my experience, three most common flaws in program logic are:
(1) Use of indicators instead of goals and objectives (the goals are “too SMART” - read more here)
SMART criteria for goal setting are very popular and well known. Unfortunately, these useful criteria are often misused: in order to make the goals “measureable” people often use indicators instead of goals, which has negative consequences. Reconstruction of program logic (RPL) helps programs focus on improving life rather on decreasing or increasing numbers.
Read more here..........
Evaluation Space: Reconstruction of Program Logic as an Essential Co...: Reconstruction of program logic is development of a comprehensive chain of reasoning that links investments into a program with the program...
In the real world logic of programs under evaluation is not always clear and consistent. According to my experience, three most common flaws in program logic are:
(1) Use of indicators instead of goals and objectives (the goals are “too SMART” - read more here)
SMART criteria for goal setting are very popular and well known. Unfortunately, these useful criteria are often misused: in order to make the goals “measureable” people often use indicators instead of goals, which has negative consequences. Reconstruction of program logic (RPL) helps programs focus on improving life rather on decreasing or increasing numbers.
Read more here..........
Evaluation Space: Reconstruction of Program Logic as an Essential Co...: Reconstruction of program logic is development of a comprehensive chain of reasoning that links investments into a program with the program...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)