IMPROVING THE GOVERNANCE OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

1. IMPROVING THE GOVERNANCE OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS by Professor F. S. Idachaba Department of Agricultural Economics University of Ibadan Former Deputy Director General ISNAR, The Hague and Pioneer Vice Chancellor, University of Agriculture, Makurdi

2. THE MEANING OF GOVERNANCE 5 Questions about Rural Development Projects before we examine improvements in their governance: • What Rural Development Projects require improved governance? • Why Rural Development Projects in the first place? • How are Rural Development Projects formulated and implemented? • Rural Development Projects formulated and implemented bywhom?

3. The 5 Questions on Rural Development Projects • Rural Development Projects for whom and for whose benefit? The What Question: Old paradigm: • Focus on agriculture sector • Focus on increased yields, production and commodity surpluses • Neglect of personal incomes • Neglect of well being of rural people • Neglect of equity considerations • Neglect of women issues

4. The What Question • Top-down processes with no stakeholder participation • Supply-driven processes New paradigm: • Focus on all sectors in rural space • Emphasis on personal incomes and rural poverty • Emphasis on rural well being • Emphasis on participatory processes and ownership of rural development projects by key stakeholders • Focus on women issues

5. The Why Question Old paradigm: • Agriculture as the engine of growth, with two-sector growth models providing the intellectual underpinning • An implied “horizontal percolation” theory that since agriculture is the dominant sector in rural space, its growth will somehow percolate horizontally to the other sectors in rural space • Agriculture as a “horizontal growth percolator” • Rural man has been treated as “the invisible man” of development theory and development practice

6. The Why Question cont’d • Rural woman has always been treated as “the invisible woman” of rural development theory and practice • Agriculture as source of raw materials for agro-industries • Agriculture as source of food for the restive urban population that constitutes a threat to governments through powerful urban-based trade unions • Agriculture as source of foreign exchange earnings to balance a country’s external account

7. The Why Question cont’d • Agriculture as source of wage goods and market for goods and services from manufacturing in the the non-agricultural sectors • Agenda and guidance of foreign donors and their shifting paradigms The New Paradigm: • Failure of agriculture as a “horizontal growth percolator” • Rural people, as people, not merely as producers of surpluses of commodities required by the urban economy of developing regions and the developed countries, but as human beings, as the new

8. The Why question cont’d centerpiece of the new rural development strategy • Democratization of political regimes and rising political importance of the neglected rural majority • Accelerating rural-urban migration and the rural development imperative • Pressures from changing fads and fashions of foreign donors

9. The How Question The Old Paradigm: • Rural Development Projects prepared by foreign donors and /or their collaborators in the ministries of food and agriculture and related ministries and their private sector friends in the consultancy community with practically no involvement of the rural people, the intended beneficiaries • Rural development priorities were determined by foreign donors and their public sector collaborators on perceived needs basis rather than on basis of actual needs and priorities of rural people

10. The Why Question • No explicit rural development policy to guide the articulation and formulation of rural development strategy and projects • Rural development projects not treated as varieties that should of necessity be subjected to varietal trials for sensitivity to environmental stresses before implementation to minimize implementation (varietal) failures • Non-involvement of intended beneficiaries in implementation • Absence of impact assessment

11. The How Question cont’d The New Paradigm: • Participatory processes in project formulation involving wide spectrum of stakeholders and intended beneficiaries • Involvement of intended beneficiaries in rural development priority setting • Rural Policy frame to guide the formulation of rural development strategy and projects • Subjecting rural development projects to varietal trials for sensitivity to environmental stress • Well formulated and well implemented RDPs

12. The By Whom Question The Old Paradigm: • Formulation by donors, civil servants, the consultancy community, to the neglect of other stakeholders • Priorities set by donors, civil servants and policy advisers • Implementation by foreigners appointed by donors, civil servants from ministries and parastatals, with intended beneficiaries as hapless spectators • Weak monitoring and evaluation by civil servants, donors and their friends, lacking independence

13. The By Whom Question The New Paradigm: • Stakeholders and intended beneficiaries involved in project formulation and implementation • Intended beneficiaries involved in priority setting in a bottom-up approach • Intended beneficiaries involved in project implementation • Intended beneficiaries involved in project monitoring and evaluation • Intended beneficiaries involved in project impact assessment

14. The For Whose Benefits Question The Old Paradigm: • Farmers and consumers of present generation • Foreigners, contractors and merchants in the supply chain • Political leaders and civil servants engaged in rent-seeking behavior • Unintended beneficiaries The New Paradigm: • The rural majority, rural people • Present and future generations of rural and urban people • Intended beneficiaries

15. MEANING OF GOVERNANCE OF RURAL DEV PROJECTS • Governance as “the way an organization is guided and steered” (ISNAR, 1998) and therefore a critical factor in the performance of rural development projects • governance is the meeting point of the internal and external environments • medium through which the goals and aspirations of rural development representing the interests of diverse stakeholders are translated into reality through optimum use of available resources • quality of internal processes and institutional products is reviewed through the medium of governance • Governance as framework where decisions about rural

16. MEANING OF GOVERNANCE OF RURAL DEV PROJECTS Why Focus on Improved Governance of Rural Development Projects? • Global trends towards democratization and decentralization have brought governments closer to the people • The change from the military to democratic government has introduced greater standards of accountability for projects, including rural development projects • Greater voice and participation of the people • Globalization and economic liberalization require more flexible and proactive institutions

17. Why Focus on Improved Governance? • The need to strengthen public management capacity to eliminate past wastages and inefficiencies in the execution of rural development projects • The National Assembly-the legislative arm-demands new standards of accountability from government in the execution of rural development projects • Increasingly scarce resources within the context of Structural Adjustment Programs and the fiscal allocative efficiency imperative

18. Why Focus on Improved Governance? The Old Paradigm: • No requirements within government at the level of the Presidency, the Ministry of agriculture, the State Government and the Local government to involve local communities and key stakeholders in decision making in the project formulation phase (definition of project objectives, setting of priorities, etc.) • Lack of transparency in the appointment of Management Teams for Rural Development Projects • Lack of accountability

19. Why Focus on Improved Governance? • Low levels of monitoring and evaluation capacity • Absence of impact assessment of projects The New Paradigm: • Involvement of intended beneficiaries and key stakeholders in the formulation of rural development policy, rural development strategy and rural development projects, including participatory determination of rural development priorities • Stakeholder participation in the selection of management teams to run rural development projects

20. New Paradigm in Improved Governance of Rural Projects • Explicit statement of values, vision and mission of rural development projects • High level of transparency • High level of accountability • Sensitivity analysis of rural development projects for resistance to environmental stress • Effective and functioning monitoring and evaluation mechanisms • Environmental sensitivity analysis of rural development projects • Impact assessment analysis of projects

21. Stakeholder Participation in Improved Governance

22. Typology of Improved Governance Stakeholder Participation and Accountability:

23. Typology of Improved Governance Stakeholder Participation and Transparency:

24. Typology of Improved Governance Transparency and Accountability:

25. Typology of Improved Governance Transparency and Corruption:

26. Typology of Improved Governance Accountability and Implementation:

27. Typology of Improved Governance Transparency and Implementation:

28. Typology of Improved Governance

29. CONCLUSIONS • Good governance is the joint responsibility of the World Bank and all other stakeholders who are jointly liable for implementation failures • Implementation teams of World Bank rural development projects should reflect some cultural diversity to reduce the possibility for easy collusion and complicity that lead to implementation failures • For improved governance of rural development projects, stakeholders must have shared values, at least a minimum core of fundamental core of shared values that will guide behavior of all

30. CONCLUSIONS parties • Rural development projects must be subjected to ex ante analysis of risks of implementation failures • Midterm reviews and supervision missions should involve the independent evaluation unit of the World Bank much earlier in the implementation phase rather than past practice when the unit was involved ex post, more or less as a post-mortem, when the project is dead and buried, the culprits have absconded from the Bank on retirement and the borrowing country is stuck with repayment of

31. CONCLUSIONS the loans. This should not be the case with the new generation of projects from the new World Bank new Rural Development Strategy.

32. CONCLUSIONS ex ante analysis of risks of implementation failures and adequate provisions made