some perspectives on development
DESCRIPTION
Some perspectives on development. Common Characteristics Politics and Leadership. Leadership, Governance, and Effective Government Political leadership and effective, pragmatic and when needed activist government A focus on inclusive growth: combined with persistence and determination - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Some perspectives on development
GRO WTH DYNAMICS: TRANSITIO NS IN YEARS AS A FUNCTIO N O F THE GRO WTH RATE
0
100
200
300
400
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
GRO WTH RATE %
YEAR
S
POOR TO ADVANCED
POOR TO MIDDLEINCOME
Common CharacteristicsPolitics and Leadership
•Leadership, Governance, and Effective Government•Political leadership and effective, pragmatic and when needed activist governmentA focus on inclusive growth: combined with persistence and determinationWillingness to experiment, act in face of uncertainty about policy impacts, and avoid paralysisGovernment that acts in the interests of all the citizens of the country – as opposed to itself or subgroups
Where do we come from in development cooperation
•Start 1949: technical assistance through UNDP in Indonesia
Where are we now?
Full fledged programme with:
•Transfers of cash•Technical advice•NGO funding•Profit sector engagement•Multilateral financing•Knowledge build up•Debt relief• ….
How did we proceed?
• Thinking in development cooperation shifted, based on experience
To be distinghuished:– Role of donor– Role of partner– Paradigm
The real start: 1960’s
• Poor countries lacked financial, physical and human resources to catch up with developed countries.
• The gap analysis was the driving force for action
• A strong geographical feature in development thinking
After the start
• As from 1970 we can distinguish between different phases:– Basic needs: micro perspective strong– Structural adjustment: macro perspective strong– Human development: service delivery strong– Governance: ownership strong– Integrative approaches: security strong– Throughout: trade/aid balance shifting
4 typical programmes (1)
• 1970’s : countervailing power• Characteristic: the expert
Features:– Gap thinking– Purpose to build uip countervailing power– Technical advise– Modesty by donor
4 typical programmes (2)
• 1980’s: counterparts• Characteristic: social mobiliser
Features:– From gap to cooperation and exchange– Donorship– Island approaches– Focus shifted to constraints
4 typical programmes (3)
• 1990’s: ownership
• Characteristic: the advisor
Features:– Connectivity: linking micro, sector, macro– Sectorwide approaches– Governance focus
4 typical programmes (4)
• 2000: holistic, integrated approaches• Characteristic: security-development nexus
Features:– Defense, diplomacy, development– Accountability– Partnership– multitakeholder
Paradigm shifts (1)
• Gap thinking– investments
• Capacity building– technical assistance
• Social mobilisation – from power to governance
• Resolving constraints– technocratic solutions
Paradigm shifts (2)
• Donorship-ownership-partnership -conditionality
• Multistakeholder approaches – ngo’s and private sector
• Delivery modus to knowledge modus
• Scaling up
Policy shifts (1)
• Poverty at the core – shifting ideas what poverty is :issue-itis– DAC model of poverty with 5 dimensions
• Governance at the core– Public sector reform– Public finance management– Right based approaches
Policy shifts (2)
• From economic growth to service delivery and back again
• From governance to accountability
• From eonomic stability to governance stability
• From delivery to cooperation
• From development to aid and back again
Shifting approaches (1)
• Broadening– DAC poverty model– Aid + coherence isues + knowledge– Multiple stakeholders in donor and partner
countries– Channels for aid delivery: bilateral,
multilateral, civilateral and comercial
Shifting approaches (2)
• From solidarity to investment– Bussineslike approaches: contracts– Conditionality: from throughput conditions to
results conditions– Policy space: a new agenda of building trust– From technics to politics
Shifting approaches (3)
• From partner focus to donor focus– From projects to programmes: process
orientation– Paris agenda and Accra: results and evidence– Donor coordination: reducing costs only?– Trust in donor institutions diminishing– New grounds for multilateralism?
Some conclusions (1)
• Development is back into public debate
• Development is as much about ‘ them’ as about ‘ us’ .
• Shifting ideas, paradigms and approaches are a sign of learning, not of experimentation
• Development is a global interest
Some conclusions (2)
• How to organise poverty reduction as a global public good?
• Global public goods are affected by all public policies
• Coherence, knowledge and aid are intrinsinkly linked
• How to shift development thinking to the core of public policy making