 |
|
|
|
Enabling beneficiary Participation
By focusing on the demand for services by the poor, it has been found that groups have been able to increase the supply of such services to the poor. Hence, groups have generated an increase in the participation of the poor in the receipt/utilization of a wide range of government services. In all cases, groups have enhanced the ability of the poor to participate in their own decision-making, achieved partly through training, and also the new dynamic generated by the group formation process. This is manifested not only in decision-making relating to group enterprises, but also in other joint community/social development action. (For example, in Nepal and Indonesia MTEs reported that the degree of participation of group members was higher than that of non-members in other services and programmes such as family planning, sanitation, participation in training, and access to government health services.)
In order to foster this development the lesson is that groups need to be formed initially for social mobilization, to receive training, and for receipt of services. This can then lead on to participation, empowerment and the impetus to take responsibility for development activities. Credit plays an important part in this process.
In general the CPE for Pakistan welcomed the use in the newer projects of the AKRSP (Aga Khan Rural Support Project) model to develop village level planning and to increase beneficiary participation; there are shortfalls in terms of IFAD targeting in this model, but there are also many community benefits. In Bangladesh, where beneficiary participation is a stated objective of government development plans, which also enable the complimentary use of NGOs as agents of social mobilisation; this is a significant advantage for project designers and enables the process of participation to be included in present and future projects without hindrance
However, the formation of small groups (of usually no more than ten members), can deprive them of potential benefits of scale in economic and social activities. In Sri Lanka, the MTE advocated Group Centers, (loose federations of around ten groups), to promote common action for economic and technical services and training. In Indonesia, Associations (of groups) have been formed to overcome the economic price of maintaining savings and loan repayments as idle capital; neighbouring groups (around ten groups, with roughly ten members each) deposit their instalment and interest payments on a weekly basis, forming a pool of floating capital which they lend to group members and non-members on a weekly basis at interest rates of up to 5% per month. Such Associations and Group Centers have opened up new dimensions and possibilities for increasing/improving beneficiary participation.
- Group modalities are capable of yielding high levels of genuine participation by the poor, not only in project activities, but also in outside community activities.
- Small groups need only be the first step in the institutional ladder, with the possibility of forming larger units to enable greater participation and empowerment.
References:
1. Bangladesh - Grameen Bank, 161-BA,1985.
2. Bangladesh - Grameen Bank Phase III, 239-BA, 1989.
3. Bangladesh Country Portfolio Evaluation, CPE94 CESBA94E, IFAD 1994.
4. India - Tamil Nadu Women's Development Project, 240-IN R240INAE, Mid-Term Evaluation, 1995.
5. Indonesia - Income-generating Project for Marginal Farmers and Landless, 215-ID R215IDAE, Mid-Term Evaluation, 1994.
6. Nepal - Second Small Farmer Development Project, 166-NE R166NPCE, Completion Evaluation, 1993.
7. Pakistan Country Portfolio Evaluation, CPE95 CESPA95E, IFAD 1995.
8. Sri Lanka - Kegalle Rural Development Project, 179-SR, Mid-Term Evaluation, 1992.
9. Sri Lanka - Small Farmers and Landless Credit Project, 219-SR, Mid-Term Evaluation, 1994.
