Group inequalities and localised conflict: Exploring the linkages for development

Group inequalities and localised conflict: Exploring the linkages for developmentCEPA 10th Anniversary Colloquium30 June 1 July 2011

Azra Abdul Cader, CEPA

Outline of the presentationObjectivesHorizontal inequalityStudy framework, methodologySelected findings Grievances and programmesTargeting Strengths and challenges of programmes in conflictRecommendations

Objectives of the presentation Present selected findings from a studyon group inequalities and conflictFactors that programmes consider/need to considerThe study was undertaken during the war (2009) still relevant in the context of aggressive relief and development efforts Horizontal inequalities (HIs) = inequalities among groupsInequality measured VERTICALLY over a range of individuals or householdsrelated to income or consumption Policies (efficiency/poverty) generally in terms of individualsBUTPeople grouped by religion/race/ethnicity/age/gender/location/classNot easy: defining group boundaries; boundaries often fluid; people can regroup Yet in many contexts group identities are persistent and important

4Framework: Context, variation, conflict and programme interactionGroups & DemographicsSocio-economicPoliticalCultural SizePower and politicsLeadersCompetition & interestsPatron-client networks

ResourcesNaturalMan-madeSocial & Economic capitalAccessManagementInstitutionsGovernment structuresNon-government structuresCapacity, willingness, skillHistory

GrievancesTrigger Conflict (violent/ social tensions)ORReduce conflict improve social relationsDevelopment resources, policies, processes and programmes5Social StructureInter-group relationsSociety-state relationsSocial NormsBehaviorCognitionProgramme resources, rules & regulationsInter-group participationDecision-making processTransparency, accountabilityTargeting, funding distributionBUILDS SOCIAL COHESION (or not) REDUCES INEQUALITIES OF ACCESS (or not)SOCIAL TENSIONSINDIRECT INTERVENTIONS THROUGH PROGRAMMES:IMPACTS ON CONFLICT ENVIRONMENTDIRECT INTERVENTIONS THROUGH PROGRAMMES: IMPACTS ON CONFLICT Programme Structures: Forums/ Complaints Mechanisms(Spaces to negotiate)Facilitators and Points of Contact(People)

CONFLICTAdapted from Barron, Diprose and Woolcock (2006; 2010)MethodologyQ2 mixed methods HH survey and indepth interview Household sampleTarget beneficiaries (purposively selected)People who were not targeted (purposively selected)Random sample (to capture other programs)In-depth interviews program staff, local leaders, other programs in the area3 development programmes studied in-depthCommunity focus and involvementDelivery tangible resources (homes, infrastructure, savings and loans schemes) intangibles (trainings, skills development, peace forums, meetings, etc)Areas working in ethnic homog/heterog 3 districts tension, level of aid, homog/heterog7KEY FINDINGS: GRIEVANCES AND PROGRAMMES8Programmes causing grievancesProgrammes causing grievances (contd.)Exist with ALL development programmesprogrammes bring change and this is contentiousHigher levels of grievances indicate BOTHknowledge and demands for democratic decision making potential problemsPeople complaining can be a positive indicator of social change and transparent decision making Managing tensions so they dont escalate is key10Types of Grievances in generalGroup targeting (how funds distributed between local groups)A lack of village level/specific group participation in design/needs/implementation Poor knowledge of local context and response to community needsElite capture and programme manipulation11Grievance Driven ActionExplaining low levels of GDAsThe context in which people live, and how safe they feel in taking action to redress grievances is importantSometimes field staff have good local knowledge but are restricted in managing tensions by program rules and organisational mandatesSometimes programmes are aware of conflicts they generate but have no budget or resources to deal with itKEY FINDINGS: GROUP TARGETING 14Targeting: Groups who benefitGroups were primarily defined based on gender (especially women and widows), and based on livelihoods (farmers and fishermen were the main beneficiaries identified)

Beneficiary identification defined by vulnerabilities and socio-economic characteristics rather than religious or ethnic identities

People rarely disagree with who gets the programme but know when groups are excluded (it is more contentious in places where there is less aid)1515Group targeting related grievancesGrievances around targeting arise from:who is included and excludedknowledge of what is available the nature of the programme and community involvement in it whether groups were excluded initially or there has been a level of manipulation Some avoidable, some are not

16Strengths in conflict managementOverall satisfaction of implementation, main reasonsCommunity trust in implementersImplementers ability to study the situation, their experience and technical knowledge, lack of biased and favouritism Transparency and communicationMeeting community needs, and targeting the right groups

All worked with local partners over the short and long termBuilt their capacities through trainingBrings local knowledge into the programme Made them sensitive to local conflict triggers

Other: Transparent selection criteria, inbuilt checks and balances and open complaints mechanismsChallenges in conflict managementAttempts by elites to influence selection of beneficiaries and other areas of programmingWhat has helped mitigatea great deal of dialogue and facilitation with state partnersprogrammes identify at the onset which groups may pressure them for access to resources and design strategies to manage these tensionsUsing networks at the national and local level facilitation, dialogue and compromise Attempts by elites to influence selection of beneficiaries and other areas of programming - elected politicians, local govt representatives and powerful local elites What has helped mitigate a great deal of dialogue and facilitation with state partners programmes identify at the onset which groups may pressure them for access to resources outside of programme rules and design strategies to manage such tensions Using networks at the national and local level facilitation, dialogue and compromise (involving some of some pressure groups in training programmes)18Some recommendations Programmes needFlexibility to accommodate local contexts (power relations, group presence and demands, existing institutions, existing tensions)Incorporate local knowledge to not worsen inter-group relationsFacilitation, coordination, complaints mechanisms and protection to ensure that people take action to voice and seek redress for their grievances safelySocial mapping and pre-planning, budgetary allocations for in-built conflict management processes which take into account national and local group dynamics and manage the tensions programs generate19