md july 2011 small

8/6/2019 MD July 2011 Small

1/32

www.mdaydvlpm.

InterAction

140016thStreetNW,Suite210

Washington,DC20036

Aad

FemaleGenita

Mutilation/Cutting

Japans

Emergency Planning

jobs

Findyournextdevelopm

jobonpage30oronline

a

cAreer

s.interAction.o

rg

ca UsAiD Lad

Country-ledDevelopment? Stakeholders

Infuence ngo Pma

th La iu ad td iaal Dvlpmad Humaaa Aa

MonDA DeeLoPMents MAgAzine

Lal cvl sy:

Beneciaries

Beyond


2/32


3/32

DepArtmeNtS

4 rf mh Pd

5 iby

25 b Pa

27 P

30 j oppu [Alsovisitouronlinejobboard atcareers.interaction.org]

8

Ju2011 Vo.29No.7THISISSUE

MonDA DeeLoPMents MAgAzine

3

19 Aad Fmalgal Mula/

cuKey steps to bring the practice to aquicker end.By Nafissatou Diop

21 A Ma chall a nw na: suhsuda ruProviding the right support nowto ensure a promising future.By Erol Yayboke

22 shAualy

cmmuA new framework highlightsjust how much stakeholders caninfluence NGO performance.By Niaz Murtaza

24 g Daa rhWhats wrong with currentpractices in gender-based violencedata collection and sharing?By Kristy Crabtree

13 japa emyPlaThe reality of Japans disaster haschallenged old assumptions anddemanded new approaches.By C. Kenneth Quinones

15 Ahaa M-Ml chld cuFinally, a feel-good story fromAfghanistan.By Gretchen Bloom

17 MllumDvlpm rhOne reason the MDGs remainout of reach.By Ellen Dorsey, Mayra Gmez,Bret Thiele and Paul Nelson

FeAtureS

8 bydbaThe changing landscape of localcivil society development efforts.By Lisa Schirch

10 Paadm Whplah gu rm?Using donor leverage tocreate effective, broad-basedparticipation.By Paul R. Miller

11 g hHu odChanges at USAID that canstrengthen localcivil society.By Allison Grossman and

Jennifer Rigg

15

19

13

22

JUly2011M

ONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

24


4/32MONDAY DEVELOPMENTSJUly20114

Managing Editor/Creative DiChad Brobst

Advertising/Subscription

Zoe Plaugher

Copy Editor

Kathy Ward

Executive Editor

Sue Pleming

News Editor

Tawana Jacobs

ProofreaderMargaret Christoph

Monday Developments Magais published by:

InterAction

1400 16th Street, NW, Suite

Washington, DC 20036

Tel: 202.667.8227

[email protected]

ISSN 1043-8157

Monday Developments Magazinelished 11 times a year by Intethe largest alliance of U.S.-based tional development and humanitargovernmental organizations. Wit

than 190 members operating indeveloping country, InterAction wovercome poverty, exclusion anding by advancing social justice andignity for all.

InterAction welcomes submissinews articles, opinions and anments. Article submission does nantee inclusion in Monday DevelopWe reserve the right to reject sions for any reason. It is at the diof our editorial team as to which are published in individual issues.

All statements in articles are topinion and responsibility of the a

Articles may be reprinted with prmission and attribution. Letters editor are encouraged.

A limited number of subscriptiomade available to InterAction magencies as part of their dues. Insubscriptions cost $40 a year (afor airmail delivery outside thSamples are $5, including pAdditional discounts are availabulk orders. Please allow 4-6 wedelivery. Advertising rates are aon request.

MonDA DeeLoPMents MAgAz

Re ect ions romthePresident

Country ownership: two words inthe development jargon with a widevariety of meanings, but whoseconnotations, if correctly applied, canlead to a lasting, positive impact on the worlds poor.Born out of the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effec-tiveness, the definition of country ownership vacil-lates between government-owned processes andmore inclusive society-owned approaches. The nar-row definition, government ownership, constrains

the positive outcomes envisioned for this principleby limiting the democratic space and resources forcivil society to operate. This has major implicationsfor development assistance in practice, includingwhere aid resources flow.

To realize the positive implications of this ParisDeclaration principle, true country ownershipentails the full and effective participation of a coun-trys population through legislative bodies, civil soci-ety groups, the private sector, and local, regional andnational governments in conceptualizing, imple-menting, monitoring and evaluating developmentpolicies, programs and processes. When correctlyapplied, country ownership enables a broad rangeof stakeholders to participate in an ongoing andmeaningful way in development processes and to seetheir contributionsreflected in the deci-sions and actions thatshape national andlocal aid agendas.

What does thismean in practice?

Timely and acces-sible informationdistributed in waysthat can be easily

accessed by a broadrange of stakeholderswith sufficient timeto contribute input to decision-making processes.

Consultations to engage affected stakeholders andensure initiatives achieve their intended outcomes.

Participation that enables local organizations,community leaders and individuals to have a deci-sion-making role in programs that are intended tobenefit them and to build their capacity to engage inthe accountability and transparency of aid programs.

As the development landscape becomes more

complex for all actorsinternational NGOs, localcivil society, multilaterals,armed forces and govern-mentcountry ownershipbecomes an even moreimportant tool for societ-ies to take charge of theirown development. Take, forexample, Afghanistan. As

U.S. troops slowly pull out, a security, political and

development gap will be created. Effective countryownership will help limit the negative impacts ofthis gap by empowering not just the Afghan cen-tral government but also local governments andAfghan civil society leaders. International andAfghan NGOs are integral to this process as theirwork helps vulnerable populations and builds thecapacity of Afghan institutions and people.

In Afghanistan as in all other areas, civil societyis a critical component of country ownership. Localorganizations provide a platform for people to engagein political processes, holding their governmentsaccountable for everything from service delivery toprotection of civil rights. These organizations canalso be important means for vulnerable and margin-alized communities to influence political processes.As major providers of private development to localcivil society, international NGOs work to align theirefforts with official donor and host country gov-ernments. Their input and active participation isessential for effective and sustainable development.

Development assistance based on efforts thatreflect the priorities of a community and involve itscitizens is more likely to be supported and main-tained. Country ownership also builds societal capac-ity to help ensure long-term development even aftersome funding resources have disappeared. Significant

steps should be taken towards integrating countryownership principles into practice by all developmentactors, including international NGOs and U.S. gov-ernment agencies. I hope you will join InterActionin this endeavor both within your own organizationsand in our advocacy to the U.S. government.MD

Sam Worthington

PresidentandCEO

InterAction

Integrating Country

Ownership Into Practice

Aiaeaed erha refe hepririie ammuiy ... imre likely

e uppredad maiaied.


5/325JUly2011

MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

InoBtes

Gleitsman InternationalActivist Awardhe c Pul Lad-

hp requests nominations forthe 2011 Gleitsman InternationalActivist Award. Nominate individu-als you believe have initiated greatsocial change in their communitiesor countries. he award will begiven in fall 2011 and includes a$125,000 p and a speciallycommissioned sculpture designedby Maya L, the creator of theVietnam War emorial. For moreinformation see www.centerforpub-licleadership.org. he deadline fornominations is June 30.

Upcoming conferenceon blindnessA Aa, the fth AfricaForum, July 3-8, in Accra, Ghana,is the only global conference onblindness in Africa. Organizational

leaders, government ministers,experts, manufacturers and con-sumers share their experiences,

strategies and best practiceswhile raising awareness acrossAfrica about the rights and poten-tial of persons with impairedvision. Institutional Developmentrogram (ID) will coordinate withPk iaal, GhanaBlind nion, Sightsavers, WorldBlind nion and Norges Blind-eforbund. With the Ks oyalNational Institute of Blind eople,Africa Forum will launch echshareAfrica, a global brand aiming toprovide technology to Africans

who are blind or partially sighted.Visit www.perkins.org/idp/africa-forum for more information.

Lack of info in drugresistance mappingLimited information that is available

to map drug resistance acrossthe globe indicates how little theglobal community knows about

this issue. Currently, the c glal Dvlpm hasmapped what information there isabout HIV, pneumonia, shigella,D-B, malaria and SA. Asthe CGD states, Drug resistancemoves invisibly through communi-ties and clinics as microbes adaptto survive in the presence of drugtherapy. he information is onlybased on estimates and smallscale studies. herefore, combat-ing drug resistance will requirea better understanding of where

resistance is prevalent and how itis spreading.

In an effort to improve transpar-ency of drug resistance, the CGDcalls on pharmaceutical compa-nies, governments, donors, globalhealth institutions, health providers

and patients to share informationacross disease networks, securethe drug supply chain, strengthen

national drug regulatory authori-ties in developing countries andcatalyze research to speed thedevelopment of resistance-ghtingtechnologies.

For more information, see www.cgdev.org.

Cookstoves and charcoalAt a meeting last year in Cancun,exico, world leaders agreed thatdeep cuts were needed to limitthe rise in global temperature to2 degrees C above pre-industrial

levels. However, according to theieA estimate, worldwide CO

2

emissions from the energy sectorreached a record 30.6 gigatons in2010. ising global temperaturesare putting an increased strain onfood production as well. On one

Clements has been helping embassies,

corporations and other organizationsmeet their international insurance

needs for over 60 years. For a free

quote, visit clements.com or call us

today: +1.202.872.0060

TAKE CLEMENTS WITH YOU.

NEVER LEAVE

ANYTHINGTO CHANCE

C A R P R O P E R T Y H E A L T H & L I F E S P E C I A L T Y & H I G H R I S K I N S U R A N C E

To keep up-to-date on community news between issues, follow us on:

Facebook www.facebook.com/interaction.org

Twitter twitter.com/interactionorg
http://www.centerforpublicleadership.org/http://www.centerforpublicleadership.org/http://psf/publications/MD/2011%20MD/07%20July%202011/Articles/www.perkins.org/idp/africa-forumhttp://psf/publications/MD/2011%20MD/07%20July%202011/Articles/www.perkins.org/idp/africa-forumhttp://psf/publications/MD/2011%20MD/07%20July%202011/Articles/www.perkins.org/idp/africa-forumhttp://psf/publications/MD/2011%20MD/07%20July%202011/Articles/www.perkins.org/idp/africa-forumhttp://www.centerforpublicleadership.org/http://www.centerforpublicleadership.org/


6/32MONDAY DEVELOPMENTSJUly20116

InoBtes

hand, reducing CO2

emissionsmeans keeping forests intact.However people in poor agricul-

tural countries, like anzania, relyon the charcoal produced fromclearing forests as a cooking fuel.

oxam predicts that by 2030,the average cost of key cropscould increase between 120 to180 percent. In order to meet fooddistribution needs among a grow-ing world population affected bydwindling land, water and energyresources, the food system hasto be overhauled. Oxfam predictsthat half of the rise will be due toclimate change. he worlds poor-

est people now spend up to 80percent of their incomes on foodand rising food prices will pushmillions more into hunger.

Dah zaak fromru notes that simply payinganzania not to cut its forests isnot the solution because peoplewho depend on charcoal may endup worse off. Instead, bdaFh of P Uvy

recommends a climate programwith efcient cookstoves that useless charcoal and better quality

crop seeds for greater yields.he sma-reDD (educing

missions from Deforestationand Forest Degradation) programcalculates how much crop yieldsand fuel efciency would have toincrease to compensate for thecosts of forest preservation. heprogram estimates it would cost$6.50 per ton of carbon dioxidesaved, almost double the $3.90needed to compensate forestusers for the loss of charcoal andfarmland in anzania. $6.50 is still

far less than the current price ofcarbon, $24 per ton in the uro-pean rading Scheme. ven adoubling of crop yields in anzaniacould be possible with a carbonprice of $12 a ton. anzania isan example of where increasedfood production and carbon con-servation can both be achieved,all through relatively low-costmeasures.

Pittsburgh: rst to passconict-free resolutionOn April 19, the city of ittsburghpassed the rst ever cf-

F cy rlu. It callson companies in the city to favorveriably conict-free products,calls on electronic companies toremove conict minerals fromtheir supply chain, and callson .S. executive leadership toestablish an international certi-cation system for minerals comingfrom Central Africa to ensure theyare not contributing to conict.

According to the organiza-tion ra Hp c,ittsburgh has sent a powerfulmessage to companies supplying

products that use conict mineralsto reevaluate their supply chainsand ensure that their products arenot fueling the deadliest conictsince World War II.

in, tungsten, tantalum and goldsourced from Congos mines canbe found in common consumerelectronics such as cell phones,laptops and televisions. Armedgroups earn hundreds of millions of

InterAction attended the G8 summit lastmonth in Deauville, a pretty seaside townin northern France. embers Wld, sav h chld, oxam,AAd, and the glal Halhcul, also joined throngs of report-

ers in a massive tent overlooking the local racecourse. he goal ofNGOs during the ay 26-27 meetings was to highlight core develop-ment issuesincluding food security and maternal healththat werenot on the ofcial agenda.

he outcome of the summit was disappointing from a developmentperspective. Final statements were short on specics and offered

vague timelines, without the needed accountability and transparencywhen it comes to meeting either past or new commitments. Oxfamsummed it up in their headline: he G8s YesNoVille Summit, ameeting where few decisions were reported.

he agenda, which was set by host France, included the Internetand its impact on economic growth; new funding for Arab Springcountries unisia and gypt; the Libya conict; a partnership arrange-ment with Africa; the global economic crisis; and how to improvenuclear safety after the Japan disaster. In the corridors, there wasalso discussion over which candidate should take over as anaging

Director of the International onetary Fund following the resignationof Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

Just before the summit, the g8 Aualy Wk gupreleased the Deauville Accountability eport, a scorecard of healthand food security commitments made by the Group of ight nations atprevious meetings. he report underscored how the worlds most pow-erful nations need to do a better job in meeting pledging commitments.

Of major concern is the slow disbursement of funds for food andagriculture programs, part of a $22 billion, three year pledge made ata G8 summit in LAquila, Italy, in 2009. So far, only 22 percent of thefunds have actually been distributed. he nited States is particularlyslow in getting funds out the door, with just $73.4 million disbursed in

the 2010 scal year even though Washingtons commitment was for$1.385 billion.

he statements released at the end of the summit included anannouncement of $20 billion in aid via multilateral institutions to helpArab Spring nations gypt and unisia. he hope is that this infusionof funds will encourage these new governments to continue on a pathto democracy rather than revert to the status quo. However, detailsof the new aid package were sketchy in the nal communiqu.

Look out for NGO attendance in November at the G20 summit inCannes, Frances movie capital.

Disappointing outcome at G8 meeting in Deauville


7/32

dollars from the mineral trade anduse systematic rape and torture inthe process. aa-like cartels con-

trol most of the mining operationsand almost 6 billion lives have beenlost to the ongoing violence.

he direct link consumers havewith the product and the war inCongo gives consumers remarkablepower to put pressure on compa-nies to stop using conict minerals.

o get involved in the campaign,visit www.raisehopeforcongo.org/action.

Federal FY2012 budgetNow that the FY2011 budget has

been passed, InterAction and theNGO community are working toensure that the FY2012 budgetescapes more drastic cuts.

he month of ay startedwith talk among House leadersto cut aid to akistan. While theObama administration argued that

foreign aid funding to akistanis vital to national security, somemembers of Congress like rp.

Kay ga (-X), proposedsome or all cuts to akistani aid.Deliberations still continue on thissensitive topic.

FY2012 subcommittee alloca-tions continued a downward spi-ral. In mid-ay House Appropria-tions Chair Hal r (-KY)released his discretionary fundingallocations for the appropriationssubcommittees for FY2012, whichincluded cuts to the State, For-eign Operations Subcommittee(SFOps). he allocation for the

SFOps was $39.569 billion aswell as $7.6 billion for the Over-seas Contingency Operations(OCO), or what the House callsGlobal War on errorism (GWO)funds. ven though the SFOpsfunding is only a 2 percent cutfrom FY2011, the FY2011 alloca-

tion was already a signicant cut.Compared to FY2010, the cut is adrastic 17-22 percent.

Senate Budget Chairman Kcad (D-SD) announced onay 19 that he was further delay-ing a markup of the prospectiveFY2012 budget resolution, untilafter the high-level bipartisan decitreduction talks currently led by Viceresident jph bd. If thedebt ceiling increases, there will beincreases in discretionary spendingcuts (which will affect SFOps).

Senator Conrad expected tomark up the bill during the week ofay 9, but now believes that any

results from the Biden-led nego-tiations, which may take weeks tocomplete, will have to be incorpo-rated into the future FY2012 Sen-ate budget resolution. Both Demo-crats and epublicans await theresult of the decit reduction talks.

he Senate also took four largely

symbolic votes on whether to begindebate on competing FY2012 bud-get plans. First, ep. Paul rya

(-WI) budget proposal, FY2012House budget resolution, did notpass in the Senate with a 40-57vote. His 10-year plan includedincremental cuts to different partsof the budget. Second, SenatorPak tmy (-A) planthat proposed to balance the bud-get within nine years throughspending cuts and reductionsreceived the most votes, but wasstill defeated by a 42-55 margin.hird, Senator rad Paul (-KY)proposal to balance the budget

within ve years by, among otherthings, drastically reducing non-warfunding at the entagon wasrejected by a 7-90 vote. Finally, thechamber also rejected consider-ation of the House FY2012 budgetrequest put forth by residentObama with a 0-97 vote.MD

InoBtes

7JUly2011M

ONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

Delivering Aid The World Over

GFS is a subsidiary of the RMA Group and the authorized

distributor of Ford Motor Company products to

humanitarian, aid and relief sectors worldwide.

We provide stock vehicles for rapid response in

emergency relief situaons, and comprehensive service

and support to keep fleets operaonal and producve at

all mes.

Working in close partnership with local Ford dealers,

GFS brings the strength of global support systems and

logiscs right to project locaons.

A trusted partner on the ground providing:

A single-source of supplies for all fleet needs

Modified fleet vehicles that meet the exact project

requirements

Total fleet management soluons that reduce

operang costs and increase efficiencies

Complete parts, warranty & logiscs support in

more than 70 countries

Consolidated financing and leasing programs

Contact Us Today: [email protected] | www.globalfleetsales.net

Supporng Humanitarian Relief,

Aid & Development Projects
http://www.raisehopeforcongo.org/actionhttp://www.raisehopeforcongo.org/actionhttp://www.raisehopeforcongo.org/actionhttp://www.raisehopeforcongo.org/action


8/32

BLisa Schirch,Director,

3DSecuritInitiativeand

ProessoroPeacebuidin,

EasternMennoniteUniversit

BeneciariesBeyond

8 MONDAY DEVELOPMENTSJUly2011

Jumu, pictured here, is a member of the Zulu Youth

Group in Nairobis Kibera slum. The group is one of 16

youth organizations assisted by the Slums Information

Development and Resource Centres (SIDAREC). The

Zulu Youth Group is made up of 28 young men, some of

whom came together as children to form the club as an

alternative to the crime and drug environment that

surrounds them in the slum. Through the provision of

start-up capital and business management training,

SIDAREC has helped the group launch several

sustainable small enterprises including a car wash, a

local recycling center, and a charcoal briquettemanufacturing facility.

The changing landscape of localcivil society development efforts.


9/32JUly2011

MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS 9

AgROwINgNUMBEROfINTER-

nationaNgOs,donors,civiian

overnmentaenciesandmii-

tarstabiizationproramsaudthe

conceptoocaonershipandead-

ershiphieatthesametimeharmo-nizinonachorusamentintheack

oocacapacit.

yetistenintothevoicesooca

civisocietoranizationsinpaces

ikeAhanistan,HaitiandIraqpaints

adierentpicture.Theandscapeo

oca-eddeveopmentismorevaried

andrichthanmanintheinternationa

deveopmentcommunitacknoede.

locadeveopmentactorsincudear

morethanNgOs.Civisocietorani-zations(CSOs)areroupsocitizens

notinovernmentthatoranizethem-

sevesonbehaosomepubicinter-

est.ManocaCSOsorktodeveop

theironcommunities.Theexposive

rothooca-eddeveopmentis

cominromcommunitdeveopment

councis,universities,journaists,abor

unions,traditionaandtribastructures,

omensoranizationsandotheroca

civisocietoranizationsthrouh

hichpeopeareeadineortstoimprovetheironives.

Theanuaeodeveopmentisrie

ithreerencetoocabeneiciaries.

Butthisterminooconvesacat-

eoricapassivitnottrureectiveo

diverse,oca-eddeveopmenteorts

herethereisnodivisionbeteen

thosehoimpementandthoseho

beneitromdeveopmenteorts.

Roles of local civil society differ fromthe roles of international NGOs

Theinternationadeveopmentcom-

munitneedsamorerobustunder-

standinoocacivisociet.Anactive

ocacivisocietisanindicatoroa

unctioninanddemocraticstate.Civi

societbothorksinpartnershipith

thestatetocompementandsuppe-

mentitscapacitandhodsthestateto

accountormeetinitsresponsibiities

andprovidintransparentovernance.

yetdonorsotenseeocaCSOsonasprojectimpementersratherthan

asoincudinthemasimportantpartic-

ipantsinassessinandpanninappro-

priate,sustainabedeveopmenteorts.

whendonorsdothistheundermine

theimportantroesoocacivisociet

inputtinorththeirondeveopment

aendasanddoinpoicadvocacto

hodtheironovernmentstoaccount.

AhanCSOs,orexampe,notethat

theinternationacommunitrotethedeveopmentpanortheircountrin

Enish,didnotoerversionsinPashto

orDarianddreonittetonoconsuta-

tionsithAhanovernmentorCSO

deveopmentexperts.

Civil society-military relations

Currentcoordinationandcommuni-

cationstructuressuchastheUNOice

ortheCoordinationoHumanitarian

Aairs(OCHA)ocusoncommunica-

tionbeteenmiitarpersonneandare,internationahumanitarianNgOs.

Currentcivi-miitaruideinesocus

onhumanitarianspaceandhumani-

tarianprincipesoindependenceor

oranizationstodotheironassess-

ment,settheironoasandtoreieve

suerinreardessobeneiciars

ethnic,poiticaorotheridentit.

SomeareinternationaNgOspre-

ertokeepocaCSOeadersouto

thesediscussions,caimintheack

experienceandsophisticationincivi-

miitarmatters.ButmanocaNgOs

inAhanistanshareinternationaNgO

concernsandareequaarticuatein

theircompaintsabouthosomemii-

tarpersonnetreatthemikecontrac-

torsratherthanpartoanindependent

civisociet.continuedonpage29

coUntr-LeD DeeLoPMent


10/3210 MONDAY DEVELOPMENTSJUly2011

C OUNT OWNESIP IS A OTconcept in international assistance.And donors, including the U.S. gov-ernment, are widely proclaiming their support

especially in the run-up to the next big aidsummit: the Fourth igh-level Meeting onAid Effectiveness to take place in Busan, SouthKorea in November. But what exactlyis coun-try ownership? Does it just mean developingcountry governments need to play a centralrole in developing and implementing aid pro-grams? Or does it entail the broader involve-ment of voices from across society? And whatdoes donor support for country ownershipmean in practice? In particular, how shouldthose who believe in the concept of broaderinvolvement address the political and struc-tural obstacles that inhibit societal ownership?ow do we prevent pernicious aid that reducesprojects to top-down government initiativesdivorced from citizen needs and input?

Challenges to the inclusion of civil societywhile not insuperableare considerable. Andthe risk if efforts fail is considerable: with thepossibility of nongovernmental actors suffer-ing a form of paradigm whiplash as donorsreturn to the practice of bypassing local sys-tems or consider development aid as a bilateralaffair between governments with little need forownership by society as a whole. The resultsof that would mean reduced sustainability and

less positive impact for the poorest people.The Obama administration has espoused

a strong commitment to country ownership.And high-level statements to that effect havebeen welcomed by champions of broaderrepresentation at the decision-making tablesthat determine the path of foreign assis-tance. These supporters argue that placingthe onus of aid planning and implementationon the people most concerned should surelyimprove outcomes, sustainability and owner-ship of the development process.

But others are more skeptical, pointing toprevious efforts in which capacity-buildingfor government ministries produced limitedresults. Some bluntly call country ownership aback-to-the-future retrofit of existing programswith a patina of local legitimacy. Such criticsnote that without much more transparency,consultation and social accountability, donorfunding of developing country plans will neverproduce inclusive development. For instance,the new donor emphasis on food security iswelcome in a time of rising food prices andclimate change. But in an era also characterizedby land-grabbing and conflict over land tenure,this well-intentioned effort may fail without theparticipation of those whose land, animals andfarming systems will be developed.

Clearly, if country ownership is to suc-ceed in producing the long-term, broad-basedresults desired, it will need to truly involve

voices from across civil society. Most NGOs

would agree. But while applauding the newcountry ownership approach and other ele-ments of aid reform under way, NGOs alsopoint to a dilemma: Designing developmentprograms locally is much preferred to top-down, Washington-dictated plans; but if devel-oping country governments are unwilling orunable to include other actors in their plans,how can our local partners get to the table andoffer their experience and knowledge? If theydo not, the resulting projects will suffer andare much less likely to be sustainable.

To this end, the U.S. government can takesteps that could have a catalytic effect andmove us all closer to the goal of real country

ownership that produces sustainable develop-ment. ere are a few measures that could getthe ball rolling:

Encourage civil society participation withan open enabling environment. The ArabSpring has reminded U.S. policymakers thatchoosing stability over democracy may riskboth of these U.S. interests. et a number ofdeveloping countriesincluding some receiv-ing significant U.S. aidhave passed stringentlaws that limit civil societys ability to speakout, contribute to development planning orhold governments accountable. These includelegal restrictions on NGO activities as well

as harassment and imprisonment of activistsor worse. The U.S. should use its influenceto resist such narrowing of space and be lessselective with its pressure. The U.S. delega-tion to the November conference in Busan onaid effectiveness should strongly support anopen and welcoming enabling environmentfor civil society actors and endorse the IstanbulPrinciples, which these actors have drafted toimprove their own development effectiveness.

Support social accountability mechanismsfor development planning and implemen-tation. NGOs should help USAID and othergovernment agencies adopt a more participa-tory and consultative approach that encouragesthe participation of civil society organizationsin designing, implementing and overseeingU.S.-funded development activities. A num-ber of positive examples could be adapted andimproved upon. For example, the Global Fund toFight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria requiresgovernments seeking funding to develop andimplement their proposed programs using aCountry Coordinating Mechanism (CCM). TheCCM is to include representatives from boththe public and private sectorsincluding gov-ernment bodies, multilateral or bilateral agen-

cies, nongovernmental organizations, academicinstitutions, the private sector and people livingwith the diseases.

While the robustness of the participationin CCMs has been uneven, it has generallyproven effective in increasing the role ofcivil society. For example, in the Democraticepublic of the Congo, the CCM is havingnew elections and 42 percent of its memberswill be from civil society. At a foreign aid paneldiscussion hosted by the eritage Foundati on

Using donor leverage to create effective,broad-based participation.

BPaul R. Miller,foreinAidAdvisor,CathoicReieServices

Paadm Whplah

gu rm?

continuedonpage29



11/3211JUly2011

MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

W EN FOU IVPOSITIVEMalawians met in 1995, they hadfew expectationsonly a desire tostick together. Gathering courage, they beganspeaking out about the problems they andothers affected by IV/AIDS faced, formingan organization that later became the NationalAssociation of People Living with IV/AIDSin Malawi (NAPAM).

In 1999, USAID and four internationalNGOs established the Umoyo Network to pro-

vide technical assistance and sub-grants to 15Malawian civil society organizations (CSOs).The USAID funding helped strengthen theCSOs governance structures and increase theirabilities to respond to donors and better influ-ence policies related to the rights and needs ofpeople living with IV/AIDS. NAPAM, amember of the Umoyo Network, grew to morethan 20,000 members (70 percent of whomare women) and became a formidable playerin IV/AIDS activities in Malawi.

Organizations like NAPAM, supported

by the Umoyo Network, ensure that assistancefrom the U.S. and other donors contributes tosustainable poverty reduction and respondsdirectly to needs expressed by local voices. Thework of USAID and its partners is critical tobuilding the technical, financial and humanresources capacities of local organizations thatfill important roles by holding the governmentand donors accountable, providing cost-effec-tive services and influencing national policies.

Unfortunately, successful cases supported

by USAID are still rare.

UsAiD: ha u?Now is the time for the U.S. government to

build on these experiences and reframe theway it approaches development, includingmeaningful partnerships with local institu-tions, sustained capacity building and a long-term, strategic approach to engaging with localCSOs. Fortunately, high-level policy docu-ments such as the Presidential Policy Direc-tive on Global Development and Quadrennial

Diplomacy and Development eview and aseries of reforms at USAID (including USAIDFOWAD) seem to be moving in the right

direction. This should increase U.S. govern-ment use of local knowledge and participa-tory approaches to formulate, implement andevaluate its development programs, and anenhanced emphasis on host country owner-ship to create policies and programs that work.Encompassed in this broader theme is the needto cultivate local organizations like NAPAM.

Putting these pieces in place will mean realchanges to how the U.S. implements its devel-opment programs. The current prioritization ofrapid, large-scale outputs can conflict with therealities of working with local CSOs. Instead,the U.S. government must take a long-term

approach to reducing poverty by partneringwith local institutions and strengthening theircapacity. The following recommendations,based on field research and experience workingwith CSOs, can help USAID as it strives to putthe concept of local ownership into practice.

cmm wk wh lal paStarting at the most basic, USAID and other

government entities must recognize the impor-tance of local CSOs as partners in poverty reduc-tion efforts and commit to building local capac-ity. Working with local partners is not alwayseasy. Despite challenges, by supporting localCSO capacity building, USAID can and hasalready begun empowering meaningful partnerswho will one day sustain poverty reduction workand advocacy in their communities.

This recognition must be supported by spe-cific guidelines with a real commitment tolocal partnership. USAIDs main policy docu-ment on working with NGOs, The USAID-PVO Partnership (2002), dedicates only a fewparagraphs to supporting local CSOs, thusleaving USAID missions and headquarterbureaus to carve out ad hoc approaches.USAID should articulate and mainstream

a new policy and field guidelines to directengagement with local CSOs, while allowingflexibility for local needs.

Fortunately, under USAID FOWAD, theagency is integrating principles of aid effective-ness as outlined in its Operational and Procure-ment Improvement Plan. This includes a com-mitment to increased partnership with local civilsociety and a pledge to improve transparency bytracking sub-grants and sub-contracts to localorganizations as well as direct funding. Theseinnovations are exciting and we urge USAID

Changes at USAID can strengthenlocal civil society.

BAllison Grossman,AidEectivenessSpeciaist,andJennifer Rigg,Director

orDeveopmentPoicandAdvocacAidEectiveness,SavetheChidren

g hHu od





to fully implement these commitments, pub-lish this new budget information on the ForeignAssistance Dashboard and develop a broader

strategy to create strong partnerships with localCSOs at every level of USAIDs work.

ruld UsAiD a apayTo work, this will require sufficient USAID

staff who have the training and flexibility to helpbuild capacity in the long term and recognizethe value of working with local organizations.One motivation for using large contractingmechanisms has been the erosion of USAIDstaff capacity. Between 1975 and 2007, the num-ber of employees at USAID fell from 4,300 to2,417, while its budget doubled between just1992 and 2007. ebuilding internal USAID

capacity is key to ensuring local organizationshave the support they need. This includes hir-ing additional procurement officers, a needalready recognized in USAID FOWAD. Tobuild partnerships with CSOs and support localcapacity building, we recommend that USAID:

Place civil society engagement officersin local USAID missions and regionaloffices;

Include capacity building and CSO part-nership topics in pre-deployment trainingfor all field staff and in continuing educa-tion for current field staff; and

Coordinate with local government and

other donors to jointly fund local capac-ity building.

In the current tough budget environment,funding these reforms and the overall develop-ment and humanitarian accounts is exceed-ingly critical. It is imperative that Congressfund the administrations fiscal year 2012 bud-get request for USAID FOWAD reforms,USAID Operating Expenses and a WorkingCapital Fund to strengthen and streamlinethe way USAID does business.

USAIDs rather modest Operating Expensesaccount supports aspects of the USAID FO-WAD agenda, including implementation andprocurement reform and the DevelopmentLeadership Initiative (DLI), USAIDs effort to

increase its staff capacity and build internalexpertise. These new DLI hires will bring sav-ings to the agency as well, reducing by 12-15percent the overhead costs of using contrac-tors. Funding these reforms and strengtheningUSAID capacity is crucial to achieve lastingpoverty reduction.

Lvl h play ld:mall a, amld ul

As USAID staffs up, it must also level theplaying field so local CSOs can partner directlywith the U.S. government. The staff time andcomplexity of applying for U.S. government

contracts, grants or cooperative agreementsis astounding. Applications can take two full-time staff over 30 days, with proposals running

more than 60 pages, regardless of whether therequest is for $250,000 or $25 million. It canalso be expensive. To be competitive, consul-tants must be hired and field assessments andbaselines completed. Local CSOs often cannotafford additional steps like these.

These challenges can be addressed in partby creating a simplified application processfor projects beneath $100,000 per year. Thisshould be accompanied by building on thework already underway at USAID to increasethe number of smaller grants and to move awayfrom channeling large volumes of resourcesthrough indefinite quantity contracts that are

out of reach for many local CSOs.

Lk wadAs USAID works to increase partnership

with local organizations, the U.S. governmentmust be prepared to invest in these efforts overthe long term. While many programs todaylook to quickly measure outputs, investmentsin local organizations must be sustained,encouraging innovation and creativity, inorder to create truly sustainable efforts toreduce poverty. A donor agency employee inBangladesh explained, What we really needto do here is a lot less sexy than setting up afew clinics. What we need to do is a lot lon-ger term and the U.S. government needs thecourage to invest in activities that may notyield quick and viable results. The importantresults that will emerge from such courageouswork, however, will be long lasting, sustainableand wholly owned by the community itself.

Programs to create local capacity and sup-port local organizations may not seem excit-ing or yield the quickest results; but they work,and USAID has the experience to prove it. Along-term investment in the Umoyo Networkresulted in a network of successful local CSOs

that continue to address the health needs ofthousands of citizens. By recognizing theimportance of building strong CSOs, partner-ing with civil society, ensuring sufficientUSAID staff capacity to support these reformsand leveling the playing field for local orga-nizations looking to engage with the U.S., theU.S. government can replicate the success ofthe Umoyo Network and other models, help-ing to create vibrant civil societies leading thepoverty reduction efforts in their own com-munities. MD

Ky ADocAc recoMMenDAtions w a all pmwh h U.s. vm

call UsAiD :

1. ca and implement new guidelines directing SAID missions engagement with localand international CSOs, which should apply to SAID efforts from strategic planning toprogram design, implementation and evaluation. he new Country Development Coopera-tion Strategy engagement and participation is an ideal opportunity to do this.

2. Pla civil society engagement ofcers in local SAID missions and regional ofces.

3. eu that capacity building and CSO partnership topics are included in pre-deployment

training for all eld staff, as well as continuing education for current eld staff.4. cda with local government and other donors to jointly fund local capacity building.

5. smply the application process for .S. government grants and contracts to allow localCSOs to engage further, and deliver on SAIDs pledges to increase the number ofsmaller grants and move away from indenite quantity contracts.

call c :

Fund the administrations scal year 2012 budget request for SAID Operating xpenses anda Working Capital Fund to strengthen, optimize, and streamline the way SAID does businessto achieve high-impact development and humanitarian response.


13/3213JUly2011

MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

jAPAn

E GEAT TOOKU EATquake on March 11 was the first timein Japans history that the government

sought international assistance. Japans SelfDefense Forces (JSDF), the equivalent ofarmed forces, and the U.S. military in Japanresponded with Operation Tomodachitorescue and assist victims. The internationalcommunity also promptly reacted with offersof humanitarian assistance. But the string ofdisastersa magnitude 9.0 earthquake, severaltowering tsunami and the venting of highlyradioactive debris from four nuclear reac-

torsrevealed serious shortcomings in Japansreadiness to respond quickly and effectivelyto natural disasters. Also apparent were gov-ernment restraints on Japans NPO (nonprofitorganizations) communitys capacity to assist.

The earthquake rattled Japan from Tokyoto Tohoku, the northern half of Japans mainisland of onshu. Aftershocks rocked the area52 times with magnitudes between 6 and 9(the 2009 earthquake in aiti registered mag-nitude 6.1). Shortly after the first tremor, sev-eral tsunamis 10 meters (30 feet) and higher

devastated Tohokus northeast coast.One tsunami slammed into several nuclear

power plants on the coast midway betweenTokyo and Sendai city. The Japanese govern-ment and Tokyo Electric Power Company(TEPCO) are still struggling with the aftermath.Explosions at four of the damaged power plantsspread radiation across Fukushima Prefectureand into the Pacific Ocean, halting farming andfishing and forcing tens of thousands of peopleto abandon their homes. The final death tollcould reach 25,000 lives. The Japanese peoplesconfidence in their government and technology

has also been shaken. Economically, upwardsof 20 percent of Japans manufacturing, agri-culture and fish production has been disruptedand some 15 percent of the nations electricitygenerating capacitywas lost.

thly vulalyPreparations to deal with natural disasters

were based on faulty assumptions. The firstwas that Japans technology would minimizethe impact of earthquakes and tsunamis. Thiswas translated into the implementation of rig-

orous building codes designed to minimizethe effects of strong earthquakes. Similarly,massive breakwaters, sea walls and tidal gates

line Japans coast to block tsunamis. A sophis-ticated, nationwide earthquake and tsunamiwarning system was established. Sensors inthe ground and on the ocean floor detect evenslight tremors. These pre-quake warningsautomatically stop speeding bullet trains,local trains and subways, and shut off naturalgas distribution and power stations. Alarmssound on mobile telephones, radios and televi-sions to inform people of a tremors locationand magnitude. On March 11, the systemworked flawlessly, but still so many died.

The building codes saved people fromthe earthquake but not the tsunami. Absent

were zoning laws to position municipal officebuildings, schools and hospitals outside areas

vulnerable to tsunamis. These sturdy struc-tures were also designated evacuation cen-ters. When the tsunami struck, many localemergency workers died at their posts in thesecenters. Sadly, many hospitals and homes forthe elderly were similarly vulnerable. A pre-liminary study suggests that almost 66 percentof the known dead were age 60 years or older.

emy pla ad pEmergency planning is divided between

local municipalities (clusters of towns andvillages that formed a single administrativeunit) and the prefectural and central govern-ments. Municipalities create and implementemergency plans. Prefectural governmentschannel information from localities to thecentral government about a disasters severityand local requests for assistance. Tokyo allo-cates assistance. Local fire and police, whichare administratively linked to Tokyo, mustawait central government directives beforereacting, except for local fire departments,which can begin putting out fires as needed.

The only nationally available disaster

assistance resource is the Self Defense Forces(SDF), i.e., the army, air force and coast guard.The central government determines when andwhere it is to be deployed. There is no prefec-tural government equivalent of the U.S. statesNational Guard. Only local fire departmentsmaintain some rescue equipment and a fewteams of three or four specially trained andequipped firemen who can quickly respond toa disaster. Police do not have any special train-ing or equipment, nor does the SDF except forthe coast guard, which has some helicopters

The reality of Japans disaster has challenged oldassumptions and demanded new approaches.

BC. Kenneth Quinones,DeanofacutResearchEvauationand

ProessorogobaStudies,AkitaInternationaUniversit,Akita,Japan

japa

emyPla



jAPAn

for rescue at sea. The central governmentmaintains a few specialized and well-equippedemergency response teams, but their role isto deploy to foreign disasters.

There are no NGOs. Instead Japans so-called NPOs (non-profit organizations) are

government managed and funded. Even theJapanese ed Cross is a government-managedNPO. Tax laws do not offer inducements todonate money to NPOs, compelling them torely on government support. This limits NPOsto maintaining small paid staffs. When disas-ter strikes, NPOs turn to volunteers, but gov-ernment officials decide if, when and where

they can be deployed. Once authorized, NPOscan enter a disaster area to assist as assignedby local governments. NPOs do not maintainhuman and/or material resources for quickresponse to domestic disasters.

The system is rational, but it collapsed inthis situation. Everything hinged on localofficials prompt response in guiding peopleto evacuation shelters and informing higherlevels of government about local needs. Butmany emergency workerslocal officials,fire and police personnel, teachers, doctors

and nurseswere among the tsunamis earlyvictims. Prefectural and central governmentauthorities were forced to turn to the massmedia for reliable information.

Communication and transportation infra-structure was destroyed, preventing emergencycrews in nearby communities from reachingdevastated areas. Also destroyed were emer-

gency vehicles needed for evacuation. eli-copters were urgently required, but no planhad anticipated this. Only the SDF had a few

to begin rescue operations. U.S. helicoptersand naval vessels were scattered and neededtime to gather along Tohokus northeast coast.

n my upplDisaster plans also assumed that the

impact of an earthquake or typhoon wouldbe brief. Evacuation centers were not stockedwith food, medicine, blankets, tents, fuel forcooking, heaters or even water. Emergencyplanners assumed that private corporationswould promptly supply local governmentsat regular prices everything needed for anevacuation center, but this proved impos-

sible on March 11 and for at least two weeksafterward. Survivors gathered in dark, coldshelters with nothing more than the clothingthey wore. Injured and elderly people soonbegan to die from exposure to cold and theirinjuries. ealthy survivors ventured into thecold, snow or rain to stand for hours in longlines for drinking water and to occasion-

Japans Prime Minister Kan speaks to

members of the Japan Ground Self-Defense

Force as he visits J-village in Fukushima

Prefecture


15/3215JUly2011

MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

ally buy small amounts of food available insome grocery stores. Some victims built firesfrom scrap wood outside evacuation centers

to warm themselves and to melt snow fordrinking water. Those who had cars couldnot use them because the lack of electricityshut down gasoline stations, not to mentionthe fact that most roads were blocked withdebris and bridges had been washed away.The SDF quickly deployed 100,000 membersto the devastated areas but they had little tooffer victims. Several days passed before theycould bring in more food, water and tents thanthey needed for themselves. The SDFs meagermedical supplies were slowly augmented byforeign medical teams. Only the U.S. militaryhad limited stocks of food to rush to Tohoku.

Japans NPOs could do little more than col-lect donations of money and used clothingand recruit volunteers. Almost one monthpassed before volunteers were allowed to enterevacuation centers where they cooked, dis-tributed donated goods and cleaned toilets.When the Japan ed Cross began distributingcash to some victims, the beneficiaries lookedconfused. The money was too little to helprebuild lives and virtually useless for buyingdaily necessities since there were few storesaccessible for shopping.

The situation in the devastated areas con-tinues to improve slowly. After six weeks, mostbasic daily needs were being provided. Butstill people in the centers have had to sleep onunheated floors, eat instant noodles and usecardboard boxes to get some privacy. Mostmust wait until August or later to be assignedtemporary housing.

Ama ngo ad japal-m d

Americas NGOs have much to offer beyondcompassion and material support. They canshare with their Japanese counterparts theirdecades of extensive, worldwide experience

on how to prepare for and respond to naturaldisasters. They couldwith USAIDs assis-tanceconsider organizing an internationalconference that would review Japans pastemergency planning and recent experience,and seek ways to better prepare for the next,inevitable natural disaster in Japan. Japaneseexperts are predicting with a 90 percent degreeof confidence that a major 7+ magnitudeearthquake will strike south of Tokyo withinthe next 30 years, if not sooner. It too will mostlikely be accompanied by a tsunami. MD

cHiLDrens circUs

LATE LAST EA, TE AFGANMini-Mobile Childrens Circus (MMCC)stunned packed tent houses nightly during

the Christmas holidays in Bagnacavallo, a smalltown of 18,000 near avenna in central Italy.Nightly at 9:00 p.m., the 10 young performers,aged 9 to 15, backed up by two adult musiciansand other staff, excited audiences with 23 acts,including acrobatics, singing, juggling, slapstickclowning and building blocks of peace.

What was especially magical was to see the

incredible confidence and skills amongst agroup of young Afghans, who, by all expecta-tions, should be intimidated by their countryspolitical situation and rendered shy by theirlack of exposure to the world. Not at all! Andthis was not the first time that MMCC hadperformed abroad. Theyve previously beento Germany, Denmark and Japan.

The girls in particular impressed me withtheir confidence, poise and joy, especially Fariafrom Bamyan, who, at 9 years of age, had notrouble shouting out, Ciao tutti! to the aston-

ished audience. The girls explained that theyhad joined MMCC to make friends, learn skillsand have fun. They will be able to use theircircus skills later to earn pocket money, theytold me. The childrens aspirations for theiradult careers are impressive: One wants to be apilot, another a journalist, a third an engineerand two others plan to become doctors.

The boys have been with the circus longerthan the girlsone for seven years. All comefrom a variety of backgrounds. When the

MMCC first began, most were street orphans,but now more come from middle-class fami-lies. One child has a university professor asa dad, a doctor as a mom. Anothers fatherworks as the painter at the circus. Some ofthem may stay on with MMCC as trainers.

The MMCC (www.afghanmmcc.org) is anAfghan-Danish foundation created to bringhope and joy to Afghan children through edu-cational activities. It was founded in 2002 byDavid Mason, an Iranian refugee who had fledhis country and been given refugee status in

Finally, a feel-good story from Afghanistan.

BGretchen Bloom,genderConsutantandformerHeadoProramme,

wfP/Ahanistan

Ahaa

M-Mlchld cu



cHiLDrens circUs

Denmark. After the events of September 2001,he went to Afghanistan where he met a Danishwoman, Berit Muhlhausen, who had come to

the country with a bag of toys to help kids.Together they launched the MMCC.

I learned about this fledgling circus in2003, when I was working in Afghanistan onhumanitarian food aid with the World FoodProgramme. I was stunned, as I usually sawonly the poor and hungrythose who weresuffering from the aftermath of many years ofdrought and war. ere was something differ-ent, just beginning.

While my husband Peter and I were inKabul, David learned of our own circus con-nectionour son Seth is a trained clown, agraduate of ingling Brothers Clown College.

Soon the Blooms became very involved in theMMCC and David was eager to tap Seth, whomhe hoped might be able to help fix their stilts.

Three months later, I stood in a salwar-kameezon the tarmac at Kabul Airport togreet Seth with a group of MMCC kidsonedressed as a monkey, another as an elephantand still others on stilts.

Seth worked with the troupe of MMCCkids, helping to rebuild stilts, training themin acrobatic and juggling skills, and creatingstories that could teach Afghan kids, theirrelatives and community members lessonsabout illness prevention, malaria, landminesand conflict resolution. The following year hewas asked to return as MMCCs artistic direc-tor and commit to spending one month eachyear in Afghanistan working with the circus.

Seth also had the good fortune in 2004 tomeet another American circus clown, Chris-tina Gelsone, who was in Afghanistan throughthe auspices of New ork Citys Bond StreetTheater to work with Afghan actors. After theirwedding in 2007, they honeymooned in theWakhan Corridor in far northern Afghanistan.They have visited Afghanistan annually as a

team since then. (See www.acrobuffos.com.)Today MMCC has branched out consid-

erably from its humble beginnings. There

are now three circus schoolsone in Kabul,erat and Bamyan, and a Childrens Culturalouse in Kabul, with activities for around350 children each year. MMCC is currentlyexpanding even further, setting up centers inleftover shipping containers in Ghor, Bada-khshan and Jalalabad. The circus providestools for children to express themselves anddevelop lifelong skills, self-respect and a senseof identity. Circus arts and performancesand childrens workshops are MMCCs mainactivities at the Childrens Cultural ouse.But painting, calligraphy, cooking, Koranicreading, math, childrens rights, journalism

and English classes are also offered. MMCCdiffers from other educational organizationsbecause children are taught to laugh and havefun while gaining knowledge and skills.

MMCC and its local partner, Afghan Edu-cational Childrens Circus (AECC), will soonhave performed before 2 million people. After

continuedonpage28

the iru prvide lr hildre expre

hemelve ad develpliel kill.

CtCt u w t lr hw w gt t rght!

Kjaer & Kjaer(u liaison fce), 1601 o Ken ee, ie 100, inon, Viinia 22209.

te: (703) 778 9400 / Fax: (703) 778 9405 / [email protected] / .kjaer.com

oized by manaces o sppy veices and moocyceso e id & Deveopmen seco o moe an 40 yeas

Whatever your daily challenge

our daily aim is to make it Possible


17/3217JUly2011

MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

HUMAn rigHts

IN A FEBUA 2010 EPOT, UNITEDNations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moonwarned that: With five years to go to thetarget date of 2015, the prospect of falling shortof achieving the [Millennium Development]Goals because of a lack of commitment is veryreal. While some in the international com-munity have tried to redouble efforts to meetthe goals on time, critics in the human rightsworld maintain that the framework itself isseriously flawed.

The Millennium Development Goals rep-resent the largest and most ambitious devel-opment program ever envisioned. They seekto make measurable progress in critical areasfacing the world today: extreme poverty andhunger; universal primary education; gen-

der equality and womens empowerment;child mortality; maternal health; IV/AIDS,malaria and other diseases; and environmentalsustainability.

We know that such ambition for breakingthe chains of poverty is desperately needed.et while some blame the global food crisis orthe global financial downturn for slow prog-ress, the reality is that the obstacles to endingglobal poverty are not primarily related to theshortage of resources. ather, a big piece ofthe problem has been that the MDGs have

almost entirely neglected to substantivelyincorporate a human rights-based approachto development.

The rights-based approach to development(or BA) represents a framework for devel-opment made up of five general criteria: (1)linking development to concrete internationalhuman rights standards like the UniversalDeclaration of uman ights; (2) account-ability of powerful actors (e.g., governmentsand international financial actors) for meetingthose standards; (3) empowering develop-ment beneficiaries, for example through rightsawareness; (4) beneficiary participation inthe design, implementation, monitoring andevaluation of development programs; and(5) nondiscrimination and prioritization of

the marginalized and vulnerable groups thatcomprise the poorest of the poor (e.g., women,indigenous peoples, children and the elderly).

The application of the BA to developmentis nothing new. In fact, in 2003 the UN Devel-opment Group, comprised of agencies likethe UN Development Programme, the UNChildrens Fund (UNICEF), and the Worldealth Organization, adopted a commonunderstanding entitled The uman ightsBased Approach to Development Coopera-tion. Practical examples of the positive ben-

efits of the human rights-based approach todevelopment are also not hard to come by. Forinstance, in South Africa hundreds of poor

families were to be forcibly evicted from theirhomes to make way for upscale, urban devel-opment in Johannesburg. Forced eviction isconsidered a gross violation of human rightsunder international human rights law. Whiletheir housing conditions were poor and per-haps even uninhabitable, the eviction planwas even worse: The families were to be forc-ibly displaced to the periphery of the city andthereby cut off from access to schools, healthcare facilities and livelihood opportunities onwhich they relied. In other words, this urbandevelopment effort would further impoverishthe poorest of the poor.

Using the human rights framework,however, these families ultimately gainedempowering knowledge of their rights andheld powerful authorities accountable tohuman rights standards, including the rightto adequate housing. And in 2008, the Consti-tutional Court of South Africa enforced theirrights, including not only the right to adequatehousing, but also to benefit from developmentschemes and to participate meaningfully inall relevant decisions. In this case, the humanrights-based approach to development equal-ized power dynamics between poor familiesfacing forced eviction and governmentalauthorities so that the families could be thearchitects of their own development solutions.Today, these families live in improved housingnear the same schools, health care facilitiesand the livelihood opportunities they came

very near to losing.

Such successes have been recognized bythe development sector and many develop-ment organizations have adopted the BAwithin their programmatic work. For example,ActionAid in a 2008 paper on its use of theBA recognized that poverty eradicationstarts with the connection between povertyand human rights, from the perspective ofpeople living in poverty. A learning project

One reason the MDGs remain out of reach.

BEllen Dorsey,ExecutiveDirector,waacegobafund;Mayra Gmez

andBret Thiele,Co-ExecutiveDirectors,gobaInitiativeorEconomic,

SociaandCuturaRihts;andPaul Nelson,AssociateProessor,Universit

oPittsburhgraduateSchoooPubicandInternationaAairs

Mllum

Dvlpm rh

We a ed pvery.bu edi pveryrequire rarmi he

ruure ha make ad

keep peple pr.



HUMAn rigHts

on the BA coordinated by Oxfam and CAE has also demonstratedthe merits of following a rights-based approach.

In another study, CAE International, the U.K. Department for

International Development and Save the Children published a reviewof projects that didor did notincorporate a rights-based approachto development. The evaluation revealed that, Working with BAs todevelopment adds value and demonstrates a greater range and depthof positive impacts, which are more likely to be sustained over time,than does working with non-BAs. Working with BAs enhancesthe possibility of achieving improved governance, which includes the

voice and concerns of poor people and can reach out to the poorestand most marginalized.

On the MDGs, the report highlights that the MDGs are onlyrepresentative of relative achievement. It would be possible to reach the

MDGs while still ignoring the worst 20 percent of poor people in theworld, that is, the poorest and most marginalized (around 500 million

people). This is not acceptable in RBAs, which work to increase equity

and improve justice, for all people, without discrimination.UN agencies and nongovernmental development agencies are

deepening their knowledge of how to employ human rights-basedapproaches to programs. This makes it all the more striking that theMDGs have not kept pace with the latest trends in the developmentsector.

What would a human rights approach mean to the MDGs? It wouldnot only tie the MDGs to well-defined human rights standards, it would

enforce processes that require nondiscrimination and equality, theprioritization of the most vulnerable and marginalized communities,and the meaningful involvement of those communities in designing,

implementing and monitoring development strategies. Scholars suchas Malcolm Langford have suggested that using a human rights lenswould mean fundamentally reenvisioning the MDGs in major ways,including ensuring that the MDG framework itself is constructedwith the participation of those living in poverty, and that developmentprograms place a higher premium on equality.

Lets take the example of Brazil. In numerical terms, Brazil hasalready met its targets with respect to Goal 1 on eradicating extremehunger and poverty. Goal 1 has three sub-targets and several indicators.et without a rights-based approach, Brazil falls into the trap warned ofabove: failing to uplift the lives of the poorest and more marginalized.As elen Mendes and Nathalie Beghin have highlighted, in Brazil 45million people still live in poverty and Afro-Brazilians and indigenouspeoples, particularly in the Amazon basin, continue to be dispropor-

tionately represented amongst the poorest of the poor. Brazilian NGOshave noted that progress on Goal 1 has been largely concentrated inthe already richer non-Amazonian states of the South East, in effectonly leaving the Amazonian states further and further behind.

Were an BA applied, ensuring that the poorest of the poor inBrazil actually benefit from the development dollars for MDG initia-tives would be a vital priority, not an inconvenient option. Not onlywould this mean looking for improvements in the aggregate, it wouldalso mean transforming the very social structures that make and keeppeople poor. For development to be truly transformative and eradicatepoverty, as the MDGs set out to do, it must explicitly target thosemarginalized populations that would otherwise be neglected, evenif they are more difficult to reach; and these groups must be able tomeaningfully participate in all facets of development programs thataffect them. These are the qualities of a development approach thatwould deliver higher quality outcomes for the poor and more durableresults over time.

What is needed right now is a concerted and targeted effort by allengaged organizations and human rights and development advocates toensure that the MDGs clearly do incorporate the human rights frame-work. The clock is ticking. We must also begin charting the course forthe second stage of this development enterprise; and for that we mustlook ahead to 2015, the deadline for achieving the MDGs. Importantly,this process needs to apply a rights-based approach by ensuring thatthe process for developing any post-2015 follow-on to the MDGs isitself participatory and nondiscriminatory. To really end poverty, anypost-2015 global framework on human development must be built

by and centered on the notion ofMillennium Development Rights.The motto for the MDGs is true: We can end poverty. But ending

poverty requires transforming the structures that make and keeppeople poor. And that transformation requires a development frame-work that invokes, embodies and prioritizes the full body of interna-tionally recognized human rights. This crucial understanding has beenmissing from the MDGs and the omission stands in the way of fulfill-ing their promise. MD

Questions and comments can be sent to the authors [email protected],[email protected], [email protected] andpjnelson@

pitt.edu.

For more information, please contact

[email protected] | 1+617.287.7116 | uc.umb.edu

The Center for RebuildingSustainable Communitiesafter Disasters

at the University of Massachusetts Boston, U.S.A., incollaboration with University College, proudly offers

wAn online non-credit professional developmentcerticate in Global Post-DisasterReconstruction and Management

wAn online 18-credit graduate certicate inGlobal Post-Disaster Studies with a focus onReconstruction with Vulnerable Populations
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


19/3219JUly2011

MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

F EMALE GENITAL MUTILATIONor cutting (FGM/C) predates Christi-anity and Islam, and is thought to haveoriginated in the time of the pharaohs. Anestimated 100 million to 140 million girls andwomen worldwide have undergone the prac-tice, which consists of the removal of all or partof the female genitalia. In Africa alone, morethan 3 million girls each year remain at riskfor cutting. Typically, traditional excisors carryout the procedure on girls between ages 4 and

12, although it is practiced in some cultures asearly as a few days after birth or as late as justbefore marriage.

Despite more than 30 years of national andglobal efforts to abandon it, FGM/C is stillpracticed in at least 28 countries in Africa andsome others in Asia and the Middle East. Thepractice is deeply rooted in tradition and per-sists because it is a social convention upheldby underlying gender structures and powerrelations. It exists at all educational levels andin all social classes and among many religious

groups, including Muslims, Christians andanimists, although no religion mandates it.

UNFPA (The UN Population Fund) haslong been at the forefront of efforts to endto this practice. In 2007, it worked closelywith UNICEF, the World ealth Organiza-tion and other UN agencies on a UN inter-agency statement on eliminating FGM/C. As aresult, UNFPA and UNICEF now lead a jointprogram to end FGM/C in one generation,particularly in 17 priority countries.

Pval ad quFGM/C poses serious physical and mental

health risks for young girls and women, espe-cially for those who undergo extreme forms ofthe procedure. It is linked to increased com-plications in childbirth and even maternaldeaths. Other side effects include infertility,severe pain, bleeding, infection, cysts andabscesses, urinary incontinence, as well aspsychological and sexual problems.

FGM/C prevalence varies significantlyfrom one country to anotherfrom as lowas 5 percent in Niger to as high as 99 percentin Guinea. When countries are grouped byregion, patterns of FGM/C prevalence emerge.In northeast Africa (Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia

and Sudan), the prevalence ranges from 80to 97 percent, while in East Africa (Kenyaand Tanzania) it is markedly lower, rangingfrom 18 to 32 percent. These figures, however,represent national averages and do not reflectthe often marked variations in different partsof a country.

There has been a marked decrease in preva-lence among younger people (15 to 25 yearsof age) in countries such as in Burkina Faso,Eritrea, Ethiopia and Kenya. New surveyresults from Egypt show that among women

Key steps to bring the practice to a quicker end.

BNassatou Diop,Coordinator,UNfPA-UNICEfJointProrammeonfgM/C

Aad

FmalgalMula/cu

FgM/c

FgM/c prevalee varieiialy rm eury aherrma lw a 5 pere inier a hih a 99pere i guiea.



FgM/c

aged 15 to 19, that rate has dropped to 81percent, from 96 percent in 2005. Since theage of circumcision in Egypt is generally below

15 and that the government has banned thepractice, these findings are encouraging andgive hope to those working to eliminate thepractice. In other countries, however, suchas Guinea, Mali and Mauritania, prevalencerates have remained basically unchanged forall age groups.

At the community level, there has beensome remarkable success, with more than6,000 communities in several countries alreadyabandoning the practice. Social mobilizationcampaigns have also led to public commit-ments of FGM/C abandonment in thousandsof additional communities. In Senegal, the

number of commitments has significantlyincreased from over 2,000 villages in 2008 toabout 4,600 in 2010 (out of 5,000 estimatedto practice FGM/C). Such declarations notonly encourage neighboring communities toalso give up the practice, they also affirm thatcommunity-led, rapid social change does hap-pen and can be effectively promoted.

Governments in many countries are advo-cating against FGM/C through official decla-rations and by adopting national or strategicplans and establishing effective coordinationmechanisms to respond to FGM/C concerns.These efforts have spurred legal reforms. Forexample, in 2009, Uganda passed a bill crimi-nalizing FGM/C. Likewise, Guinea-Bissau andKenya have draft bills that criminalize the prac-tice. In Djibouti, parliament adopted amend-ments to the penal code addressing FGM/C inthe context of gender-based violence.

Ky lm FgM/c aadmFGM/C remains on the forefront of the

UN agenda. Specific targets of the Millen-nium Development Goals promoting gen-der equality, improving maternal health andreducing child death relate directly to the

persistence of the practice. In the last decade,an increasingly concerted effort to addressFGM/C among key stakeholdersgovern-ments, international institutions, NGOs andlocal religious and community leadershasled to some significant, positive changes. Inparticular, the increased availability of datahas provided a macro-level snapshot of preva-lence and FGM/C trends, providing a usefulframework for refining programmatic strate-gies. Identifying socio-demographic factorsassociated with FGM/C has also improved

understanding of influences on the persis-tence and change in the practice and in cre-ating effective interventions. For instance,studies have shown that level of education isan important variable, with the least educatedwomen more likely to have undergone theprocedure and to have had their daughtersdo so. On the other hand, milieu and wealthare less indicative, although it is more likelyto occur among poorer and rural populations.

Experience on the ground has shown thata number of key and mutually reinforcingfactors taken together are critical toaccelerating the abandonment of FGM/C.Any effort to end the practice should takethe following into account:

Change starts from within: Empoweredcommunities can make a collectivechoice to abandon FGM/C

The global movement for positive, last-ing change starts at the community level.Since no one family can select to end thepractice on its own (it would ruin thechance for marriage and status of thatfamilys daughters), it is necessary tocoordinate abandonment by the wholeintra-marrying community. A relativelysmall initial core groupa critical masscan initially agree to abandon the prac-tice. This group can then recruit others,until a tipping point is reached for stable

abandonment when the social conventionof not cutting becomes self-enforcing andcontinues swiftly and spontaneously. The

decision must be collective, widespreadand explicit. Without feeling that theircultural traditions are being violated orthat they are coerced or judged, commu-nity members put into place a new socialnorm that does not harm girls or violatetheir human rights.

Public commitment to abandonFGM/C is a powerful means to per-suade others to halt the practiceIt is necessary, but not sufficient, thatmany members of a community favorFGM/C abandonment. A successful shiftrequires that they manifest as a commu-

nity the will to halt the practice throughan explicit public affirmation of theircollective commitment. A public expres-sion creates the confidence needed byindividuals who intend to stop the prac-tice to actually do so. The commitmentmay take various forms, including a jointpublic pledge in a large public gatheringor a publically posted written statementsigned by those who have decided toabandon the practice. Some communitiescollect signatures on traditional colorfulcloth; others give certificates of recogni-tion to families choosing not to cut theirdaughters; and others mount festivitiescelebrating uncut girls, including publicweddings. These celebrations are a formof public social recognition and a show ofrespect for the personal transformationeach individual has undergone duringthe process of abandoning the practice.

Enforcing laws would greatly contrib-ute to ending FGM/CIt is essential that governments create aprotective environment for women andchildren and actively support FGM/Cabandonment. Introducing national

laws that ban the practice can speed upchange most effectively, particularly whena process of societal change is alreadyunder way and citizens are sensitized tothe issue. The purpose of legislation isto make explicit the governments dis-approval of the practice. It also acts as adeterrent by sending a clear message ofsupport to those who have renouncedor would wish to renounce the practice.

Engaging traditional and religious

continuedonpage30

sudie have hwha level eduai

i a impra variale,wih he lea eduaedwme mre likely haveudere he preduread have had heirdauher d .


21/3221JUly2011

MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

E ETUN OF FOME EFUGEES AND OTEdisplaced persons to South Sudan in anticipation of the historicbirth of a nation is both exciting and worrisome. They return to

their ancestral motherland full of hope, expecting everything will bebetter once they are home. Southern by heritage, blood and tribe,hundreds of thousands have already returned after decades of bloodshedand displacement caused by a long, debilitating civil war that ended witha Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005. Now that the Southviareferendumhas chosen to secede from the rest of Sudan to becomethe worlds newest country in July, many that stayed away because ofthe violence have returned only to find another set of tough challengesstanding in the way of their dreams of a prosperous new nation.

chall ahadThe number of people who have returned in such a short period

of time puts significant strain on the ability of families to provide forthemselves and the degree to which host communities can absorbthem. While the prospects for successful integration are positive, theUN estimated that as of late April, nearly 300,000 had returned, withmore on the way. More importantly, according to a recent assessmentconducted by CF International with funding from the USAID Officeof Foreign Disaster Assistance, successfully accommodating the needsof returnees while minimizing conflict is going to be a serious chal-lenge that needs thoughtful intervention.

South Sudan has long been considered to be home to some of themost underdeveloped areas in Africa. The government and informalagriculture provide the vast majority of employment opportunities,but jobs are scarce. In the urban areas, such as the capital Juba, nearly200 NGOs employ a significant number of workers, who will hope-fully transition into productive government or private sector positions;

yet in rural areas, where there is often little government and/or NGOpresence, the story is very different.

With jobs hard to come by, rising prices are the last thing the largelyfood-insecure returnees need. Due to a drastic increase in demand, theprice of commodities usually imported from neighboring countrieshas risen sharply. While this creates strains on household income, italso generates opportunities for local farmers to capitalize by produc-ing more to fill the gaps between supply and demand. Unfortunately,farmers cannot produce more just yet. Even in the southern parts ofthe new country, which is known as greenbelt and was in the pasta net exporter of food in the region, subsistence agriculture todaybarely staves off famine. Even if farmers have the appropriate skills,

they often lack the necessary tools and quality seeds to produce ona scale that meets more than the subsistence needs of their families.In the cases where farmers do produce more than they can consume,limited access to markets beyond their immediate communities anda severe lack of appropriate seed and crop surplus storage facilitiesmean that a significant amountas much as 50 percent accordingto managers of the USAID FAM Sudan programwill spoil beforebeing consumed or replanted.

th h

With all the focus on returnees, it is easy to ignore the plight ofhost communities, those that have opened their doors to returneesand share what little they have, asking little or nothing in return. Formedia, governments and even some in the development community,stories of former refugees returning to the land of their forefathersafter decades of exile are compelling, awe-inspiring and tangible. Butthey are also only half of the story.

Providing the right support now toensure a promising future.

BErol Yayboke,CountrDirectororSouthSudan,

CHfInternationa

21

Diersit

A Ma chall a nw na:

suh suda ru

soUtH sUDAn

continuedonpage26

Put YourpassionInto Practice

Master of Arts in SustainableDevelopment:International Policy andManagement in Washington, DC

One-Year Program for Development Professionals

nTwo Terms Coursework, Washington, DC

nOne-Term Practicum in the Field of International Development

Scholarships and Financial Aid available

Now enrolling for September 2011

Learn more at www.sit.edu/grad-DC



OST NGOS STONGL POFESSaccountability to communities intheir work. owever, using a com-prehensive analytical framework to measurethe nature and strength of their accountabil-ity to different stakeholders, research findsthat current NGO approaches provide veryweak accountability to communities. Strongercommunity-oriented accountability mecha-nisms can best be developed through NGOcoordination bodies and there is a frameworkthat can provide a strong analytical base fordeveloping such community-focused andpeer-driven mechanisms.

Accountability aims to increase theinfluence of relevant stakeholders on theperformance of organizations that possesssubstantial authority and resources. Thus,NGO accountability can be defined as theinvolvement of relevant stakeholders in theperformance management cycle of NGOs.The relevant stakeholders for NGO account-ability are those that delegate authority orresources to them and those that use their

services. Most of these stakeholders managetheir own specific processes for exercisingaccountability over NGOs. The nature andextent of accountability that they exercise overNGOs depends on specific criteria providedunder the ow much and What for sec-tions of the framework shown in Figure 1. Forexample, the nature and extent of accountabil-ity depends on the number of phases of theNGO performance management cycle that astakeholder participates in and its frequency,influence and formality of participation.

Boards, home governments and peer bod-ies generally engage in NGO accountabilityat the strategic/global level. Board-led NGOaccountability processesinclude strategydevelopment and review and ongoing gov-ernance. Boards generally enjoy high scores onalmost all of the criteria used here. For exam-ple, board participation in the accountabilityprocess is legally required. They have the abil-ity to set standards for, undertake evaluationsof and take punitive action against NGOs.

Home government processes include initialNGO registration and subsequent reporting.The main motivation for home governments

is the protection of public funds collected byNGOs. Because of this, they tend to focusmainly on financial and legal mattersnotprogram quality or community participationand develop limited international monitoringcapacities. owever, they can set standards,undertake evaluations and take punitive actionagainst NGOs. They score high on several butnot all of the criteria used here.

NGO coordination-body processesincludeaccreditation mechanisms and codes of con-duct. While their voluntary nature limits theirinfluence, reputational factors do encouragemost large NGOs to enroll in them. Such

mechanisms generally focus on adherenceto industry standards. Most depend on self-reporting and few require third party assess-ment. Due to these limitations, they score highon very few of the criteria used here.

Donors, host governments and communi-ties generally engage with NGO accountabilityat the functional level, often with respect tospecific projects and activities. Donor-ledNGO accountability processes include proj-ect approval and evaluation. Their participa-tion in the accountability process is legallyrequired. They have the ability to set standardsfor, undertake evaluations of and take puni-tive action against NGOs. Most donors relyon information submitted by NGOs, supple-mented occasionally by their own field visits.As such, donors score high on almost all ofthe criteria used in the framework.

Host government processes include NGOregistration and reporting requirements. Theirparticipation is legally required and they canset standards, undertake evaluations and takepunitive action against NGOs. Few govern-ments undertake independent evaluations ofNGO programs or place heavy emphasis oncommunity participation or program excel-

lence. Overall, home governments score highon most of the criteria used in the framework.

Unlike other stakeholders, communitiesgenerally do not themselves manage a for-mal NGO accountability process and usuallyparticipate at the discretion of other stake-holders in the formal processes they manage,where community perspectives and programquality are not necessarily the most impor-tant consideration. For example, NGOs doundertake many processes to increase theirown accountability to communities. Such

A new framework highlights just how muchstakeholders can influence NGO performance.

BNiaz Murtaza,ResearchAssociate,MackCenterorNon-Prot

Manaement,UniversitoCaiornia,Berkee

shAualy cmmu

AccoUntAbiLit

Ulimaely he reraei-level ngoauailiy i ngoard ad he weake ngo rdiai die.


23/3223JUly2011

MONDAY DEVELOPMENTS

AccoUntAbiLit

NGO-managed accountability processesinclude needs assessments, project designand monitoring and evaluation. The internalpolicies of some NGOs require project staffto ensure the participation of communitiesin NGO-managed accountability processesrather than leaving it at their discretion. Eventhen, communities generally have no punitiveauthority, unlike most other stakeholders, incase they are dissatisfied with the quality of

NGO work. As such, communities score lowon almost all of the criteria used here.

The rigor of these processes also variessignificantly and there is sometimes a biasfor positive results. NGO staff prefer positiveevaluations that impress internal and externalstakeholders, while communities are afraid tobe critical and external evaluators have an eyeon future work. Since NGO-managed processesalso heavily inform the processes of most otherstakeholders, NGOs enjoy a high degree of con-trol over their own accountability processes.

Ultimately the strongest strategic-levelNGOaccountability is to NGO boards and the weak-est to NGO coordination bodies, with homegovernments falling in between. The strongest

functional-levelaccountability is to donors andhost governments and the weakest to com-munities. In fact, communities are the over-all weakest stakeholders. Communities havesignificantly less power when compared withother stakeholders; and the fact that the most

important motivation for those stakeholders isnot necessarily program quality combines withthe weakness of community power to reducethe quality of NGO programs. Not surprisingly,several meta-studies have found achievementsbut also major problems with the quality ofNGO evaluation processes and programs.

It is advisable then that NGOs develop stron-ger community accountability mechanisms. Itwill help to enhance program quality and com-munity empowerment and reduce the criti-cisms of external stakeholders regarding the

lack of accountability and representativeness.NGOs can strengthen their own accountabilityto communities by using the eight criteria pro-posed in Figure 1. For example, NGOs can helpcommunity-based organizations join togetherat the regional and national levels and mandatetheir participation in or even management of

md july 2011 small

Documents