130 likes | 152 Views
CRDP: Technology and Innovation use in Rural South Africa. Tim Hart and Peter Jacobs Parliament SA 7 June 2013. Economic Performance and Development. Introduction. 2010-2011 HSRC contracted by DRDLR to audit technologies used in 8 CRDP sites (Vryheid excluded)
E N D
CRDP: Technology and Innovation use in Rural South Africa Tim Hart and Peter Jacobs Parliament SA 7 June 2013 Economic Performanceand Development
Introduction • 2010-2011 HSRC contracted by DRDLR to audit technologies used in 8 CRDP sites (Vryheid excluded) • 20 wards to be extended to 160 by 2014 Social science that makes a difference
Definitions • Technology: “…any tool or technique, product or process, physical equipment or method of doing or making, by which human capability is extended”, (Wallender 1979) • Product technologies – higher productivity or improved quality • Process technologies – create new or improved products • Transaction technologies - facilitate co-ordination, information sharing and market exchange • Innovation (novel, value, diffused) – activity of invention, adoption, diffusion and adaption of products, processes, marketing strategies and organisational arrangements
Methodology • A scoping study was undertaken - involved a desktop component, a qualitative fieldwork component and an analysis component. • Due to time frame this was a participatory rapid assessment to determine current picture within historical context and local experience. • To identify technologies - focus on identifying projects / initiatives that make use of some form of technology Social science that makes a difference
Profile of Technologies • In 8 Pilot sites activities using some form of technology include 113 examples: • 64 projects receiving government and non-government support – ‘modern’ technologies • 39 initiated prior to onset of CRDP mid-2009 • 27 local initiatives using ‘modern’ technologies but with no external support • 22 examples of ‘indigenous’ knowledge • Many technologies common across sites – mechanisation, VIP latrines, hybrid seed home gardens, brick and block making, various ICTs products or support services
Recommendations Following Findings • Effectively use social facilitation processes – participation is an action and process – not simply a means to achieve consensus • Commercially oriented projects must consider existing conditions and challenges – historical and current – as well as experiences. • Build institutional technical and non-technical capacity of project participants and strengthen their relationship with broader economy – integration Social science that makes a difference
Recommendations Following Findings • Encourage and support entrepreneurs – the ignored ‘27’ • Consider alternative project models that might be more suited- Poverty projects cannot suddenly become commercial - invest in identifying models, organisational arrangements and support. • Pilots sites for learning? Establish M&E system that allows for challenges to be identified and addressed so as to ensure interventions have desired impacts – numbers say little when quality, lessons and expectations are excluded Social science that makes a difference
CRDP Between 2010 and 2012 • Access to progress of CRDP is restricted • By end 2012 – 92 wards reached out of proposed 160 (58%) • But actual service delivery unclear • Predominantly identification of wards, discussions with traditional leaders and councillors, WoP household profiling • Only 60 of 92 have been profiled (+90 LR farms) • Only 25 status quo reports ‘more or less’ completed - out of original 29 wards – nothing on the remaining 63 • Decisions taken by Council of Stakeholders – elitist • Participation, iterative learning, social cohesion, vibrancy? - are these being achieved
Food Security and Capacity Building • By 2014: expect 67 929 food gardens and agri-food parks across 160 wards = 60% of households • By 2011: only 1346 food gardens (2% of target) and 2 agri-food parks (5%) • By 2011: only 472 rural residents including land reform beneficiaries part of skills development programmes - out of the potential millions living in these areas • By 2011: 9 949 ward residents employed through EPWP and CRDP projects • By 2011: NARYSEC youth training target between 7401-7958 but what has been achieved
Policy Considerations • How much support is given to new ideas since CRDP initiated and how much is support to existing and often floundering projects? • How much thought is going into conceptualisation in terms of sustainable rural development – bigger picture? • Development process more important than actual technologies available and introduced – there are no universal solutions. • Are we building on what people know or simply replacing? • There is space for integrating IKS and modern technology- requires acknowledgement, tolerance and willingness to learn • What lessons can we learn from local initiatives? • How do projects link into the broader rural and national economy?
Conclusion • So much research exists, so much more is being conducted but what is happening to the results and outputs of this research? • What pause for reflection on the CRDP has occurred • M&E must be participatory and continuous if fundamental principles of CRDP are to be followed – once-off bi-annual assessments are useless exercises • Ships turn slowly so change in direction must be gradual and timely.