Long distance running, for years the domain of East Africa. Kenya and Ethiopia competing with each other for victories at world championships and Olympics. This week Almaz Ayana crushed the world record at the 10.000 meter womens final at the Olympics in Rio with 14 seconds in an astonishing run setting the major part of the field on a lap behind. I must say that I feel ashamed of reactions given by my compatriots participating in the race, questioning the cleanness of the win. When asked about the allegations, Ayana smiled. "My doping is my training," she said. "My doping is Jesus". This reminded me of the time we lived in Ethiopia where we witnessed the strength of Ethiopian women walking to church early morning prior to starting their days, spending their time in prayer. However only faith won't do the job as Almaz acknowledged by stating that her doping is her training.
A bit of research on the internet brought me to Bekoji, a small village in Arsi zone in Ethiopia and the birth place of Ayana and also of Dibaba her competitor during the race and many other great Ethiopian athletes. Bekoji, with just over 16.000 inhabitants, already produced 10 gold medals in international competitions. The documentary Town of Runners** point to one men: coach Sentayehu Eshetu. His lifelong commitment to his village and to running has paid off. The documentary shows the direct link between hardship (Arsi zone often hit during emergencies, appearing in many humanitarian appeals) resilience building and ultimate victory. The region is also known as an important coffee growing area, a cash-crop that could provide for good income should seasonal rains follow their normal pattern. However, El Nino has also affected Arsi zone and more and more people had to diversify their livelihoods, with very few alternatives at hand. In that perspective the enormous drive for running of Bekoji can also be considered an important coping strategy to deal with hardship and impact of climate change. Running though an individual discipline gets a communal translation in the Ethiopian reality, which is also witnessed by the warm togetherness of the athletes after the race. It exemplifies to the world and to Ethiopia itself as well that sticking together is the best option in the face of hardship or competition over scarce resources, showing that a strong community is an important stepping stone in resilience building. Today causes me to compare the Ethiopian athletes with my compatriots competing in a number of disciplines. The enormous support infrastructure available not necessarily translates in an equal amount of golden medals (though being a small country with just over 16 million people). *) http://www.espn.com/espnw/voices/article/17286920/ethiopian-runner-almaz-ayana-stuns-olympic-crowd-10000-meter-world-record **) http://www.townofrunners.com/
0 Comments
The holiday season was much welcomed this year amidst so much turmoil. It almost felt surreal joining a fleet of travelers to distant places to take a vacation. However, real vacation requires to disconnect from the global. BBC World travels always with you and so does CNN or other international news channels. Even trying the local news in Scandinavia, I was reminded of the 5th anniversary of the horrible events on the 22nd of July in Norway, where 5 years ago Anders Breivik showed that extremism is not limited to Islamist radicals capitalizing on discontent of young Middle-Eastern men. It just struck me how many youth and adults in the three holiday resorts that I visited during our Scandinavia tour are glued to their smart-phones, basically continuing gaming, watching series and having their usual 'social' talk as if they were still at home. The only way to really feel 'away' would be to disconnect from any media. Not to be taken to Rio, but to stay at home really. In searching for 'things to do' it is much more fun to visit a local Tourist Information office. I guess even your home town could become more interesting doing so. Switching identities is the trick I guess. Not carrying your whole digital identity with you while searching for things to do may offer a refreshing list of events, concerts and the like. Admittedly, being online even right now to type this blog gets me in touch with my work again somehow, though still one more week of vacation to go. The nature of my work even did not allow me to fully disconnect this week, having to prepare for a training in Kenya. And even during holidays considerations in terms of CO2 emissions are to be part of decision-making. A car-tour through Scandinavia may not have been the best option... Today I heard a sermon in church connecting work with enjoying the good life, much applying to this holiday season: For everything there is a time...
Two weeks ago I witnessed the building up of tension between several military groups patrolling Juba. I was in South-Sudan for an inception workshop of the Partners for Resilience alliance. One week later, following the date that should have been celebrated as the 5th birthday of the youngest nation on the face of the planet, new violence broke out in its capital Juba leaving many soldiers killed and civilians trying to get to safe spaces in and around the city. The program I ran the inception workshop for was to improve linkages between relief and development using an integrated risk management approach. Disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation and ecosystem management and restoration were to be combined to provide for improved resilience. I realise how lofty an ambition that is for a country torn apart as a result of internal strife over control of natural resources. Soon the violence in South-Sudan already made way in the news for the disaster in Nice and the uprising in Turkey. Still I had a sense that these three events have more in common than officially acknowledged. Poor governance paid its costly price in each of the three countries. President Hollande was not much welcomed in Nice, where the gap between rich and poor is glaring. Erdogan's policies of muting discontent and increased repression is no longer accepted by all his citizens. And also Salva Kiir and Riek Machar have not shown the greatest display of togetherness in recent attempts to implement a peace deal. In South-Sudan the situation is compounded by severe natural and man-made constraints in food production in the past growing season, forcing many people to depend on external aid, of which supplies are now even more insecure. Wat can be done to reconnect governments to citizens? What can be done to stop the global rift between the rich and the poor? Will states be able to provide solutions? Amidst these questions where no one seems to have a proper answer, the best NGOs can do is build resilience to shocks. They are likely to increase in frequency and their impacts seem to deepen. Providing help will increasingly need to factor in capacity building support for risk management. Even more necessary it is to acknowledge people's capacities for relief, recovery and development amidst disasters. Though at times it feels like going one step forward and two backward, with even international staff involved in rehabilitation activities evacuated from South-Sudan. Risks will remain. Understanding each other's risks and having them acknowledged and shared across ethnic and livelihood boundaries is the first requirement, whether in France, Turkey or South-Sudan. Leaving the EU would be the gamble of the century Cameron argued. However, on January 23, 2013 it was his idea to present a simple IN or OUT choice to the British people, should he be re-elected in office. One has to say: he kept his promise. However, what was this promise all about? And now that the Brits opted to leave, did Cameron overplay his hand? Or has he purposely steered the country in this direction? If one thing can be said about the outcome of the Brexit referendum it is that the anti-establishment wing has won. In the referendum in the Netherlands about the Ukraine membership, populist groups had even instigated the referendum to be held. However, in Britain it was the Prime Minister himself who first went to Brussels to get a deal for the UK. Watching the news around that time, Cameron made a whole demonstration out of it that he had personally brokered a deal with the EU that would allow for membership that would safeguard the economic interests without any commitment to further political integration. The first response to the Brexit is likewise. It will take two years to get a firm trade agreement in shape which will regulate preferred access to the European Market. So, what's the deal? Cameron saved his face internationally. He was reading local public opinion very well but also knew how important good friendship with European leaders would be to future British statesmanship. Now that the Brits have opted out, he can at least say: I was at your side. I am sorry it did not work out. But let us still formalise what we already agreed - proper access to the European market without much political engagement in Europe. You can deal with your own refugee crises. We won't share the burden. You can deal with your own Euro crisis, that won't affect us either, apart from providing a safe haven for investors who want to move their assets to a more stable environment less affected by these crises. However, did Cameron act in the interest of the UK? Or did he act in the interest of The City. Both Schotland and Northern Ireland as well as London showed pro-European colors during the referendum. Now that Britain will close its doors to the social unrest at the European mainland, will it be able to control the social unrest at home? Separatists in both countries will have a strong argument now against the unionists (though paradoxically Unionists in Northern-Ireland voted massively in favour of leaving the European Union). Will London and its surrounding become the new Singapore of Europe? The Pound Sterling dropped, markets strongly reacted. For the time being instability is likely to remain. But out of the ashes will an Atlantis arise where the superrich can safeguard their assets and claim The City to live out their pleasures? It is hard to predict. It would not be the first time in human history that public up-rise only served a few market players to tighten their grip on the market (see the role of the army in the Egyptian economy before and after the Arab spring). The free market hegemony came to an end. Money freely floating without any government control or interference resulted in the accumulation of a lot of wealth into a few hands leaving a scorched earth behind. Special 'free' trade zones and tax holidays helped to transfer wealth out of resource poor countries into paradise islands. The week preceding the Brexit was marked by the tragic death of Jo Cox, a mother of two and politician-activist in the UK. Unfortunately, her death did not change the discourse. It only stopped the campaign trains for a few days. To some extend for a lot of former Labour current UKIP supporters she was part of the 'establishment' and her social cause that motivated her to stay IN was not recognized by the majority of the British people. They have seen an increase of informal labour in the British labour market. They have seen their jobs being taken by Polish and other foreign workers. They cannot see how staying in the EU would give them back their livelihoods. They probably also have no clue how leaving the EU would do the job. They just want to get rid of far-away bureaucrats deciding on their future. Well, they succeeded. Hope the bureaucrats at home will do a better job for them. It all depends again on what trade deal a new British PM can broker in Brussels as Cameron thanked for the honor and will leave this delicate job to his successor, joining the corporate sector soon I suppose. Yesterday's draw got Britain a sligthly different set of cards. I don't know about you, but I am a bit tired from climbing all those mountains. One summit after the other appear in the development landscape. You can hardly take a breath or the other summit rises up in front of you. Even political leaders seem to get tired of attending summits, given the low priority G7 leaders gave to the World Humanitarian Summit last week. What is the function of a summit? How does it help the development discourse and much more important: how does it help the poor?
In the past year we witnessed a number of summits, which I also paid attention to at this website. I even attended one in Addis Ababa where quite crucially Finance for Development was discussed. However, whose agenda was driving this forum in the direction or private sector engagement, domestic resource mobilisation and improving the tax base? Private companies may be part of the solution, but certainly will not pay for the solution. Neither do western governments to a large extend. Commitments are easily made at summits. However, how much has been delivered on promises made in the past. Untie aid from the state New political realities are taking over and force politicians to take account of the eroding support base for international solidarity. Many governments failed to provide solutions at home for the disadvantaged and the labour class (look at the protests in France). Is it strange that ordinary people do not trust their governments in providing solutions elsewhere while making their citizens pay for it? It caused the debate to shift towards "How will it benefit us?". When I started to work in this sector tight-aid was a curse. We despised USAID for making aid agencies order all equipment from the USA. Gradually I saw this mentality adopted by European development actors. It took us a year to process a derogation request to purchase a Toyota instead of the European make Mercedes for an EU supported project. It went much beyond equipment and the whole rationale for providing aid has shifted from international solidarity to addressing root causes for migration. I can still get my project paid for by international donors. However, it will be framed as a measure that will prevent people from migrating to Europe. Likewise climate change may equally be framed as opportunity for innovation as it provides livelihood challenges for already vulnerable communities. It is high time to not deliver on climate goals for the sake of our own future but to show solidarity with those affected by it (including with citizens of France and Germany). There cannot be an end to solidarity as also greek citizens displayed in a documentary I saw last week. Despite the enormous economic challenges their country faces, the support for stranded refugees by citizens remains in place and is even gaining ground. Or could we say thanks to the economic melt-down in Greece the solidarity of the average Greek citizen grew stronger than ever? Facilitate citizen solidarity Do we expect too much from the State when it comes to international development aid? Rather than paying taxes for the government to show solidarity I prefer getting tax exemption for whatever I donate to an organization of my choice, less susceptible to political pressure. The citizen-2-citizen connection cannot be overemphasized in importance. Hence, rather than influencing my government to make commitments I would like the government to encourage citizens to make personal commitments beyond the current tax exemption provision. A fairly easy way to do so would be to reduce tax with a certain percentage and require citizens to donate a specific percentage of their income to registered aid agencies. Government budget could than be limited to the protection of global public goods and safety and security. It would activate citizens to take serious notice of what agencies are doing and would increase the need for transparency and accountability on results achieved. This could set an important precedent in domestic resource mobilization and avoid a lot of summits currently needed to get governments to commit resources. Green believers and practitioners Summits could than be organized at citizens level. Political parties could call on their members to take action rather than members requiring their politicians to take action. A nice example of such a mobilization is an initiative by ChristenUnie, a small Christian political party organizing a day of inspiration for their own constituency under the title "Green Believers". It will give a personal twist to what many may have considered as a public duty. Investing in a green lifestyle with due consideration of humanities' task to be good stewards of this planet. Though this may be a Christian notion, in many ways humanists have preceded Christians in actually doing so. The practice-what-you-preach mantra may also sound clearly today and hopefully will also help personal transformation. In the past week Adaptation Futures was held in Rotterdam, a bi-annual global conference, bringing together science and practice around climate adaptation. The UNSGSR on Inclusive Finance Her Majesty Queen Maxima of the Netherlands graced the audience with her presence, underlining the importance of the topic. Ironically finance was a bit of the missing link during the conference as many recommendations with regard to public policy measures pointed to public resource allocation issues. Following the agreement reached in Paris and preceding conferences on Sustainable Development and Finance for Development in New York and Addis Ababa, the momentum clearly needed to be sustained and the Netherlands offered the perfect spot to do so, also in view of its presidency to the European Union.
Climate refugees The urgency is clearly demonstrated by the current debates around migration which also percolated into the discussions in Rotterdam. How many of the refugees, in particular from Africa, are in fact climate refugees? As Europe struggles to deal with the long-term consequences of climate change, Africa is experiencing climate change first hand with El Nino hitting large parts of East and Southern Africa. Next week the World Humanitarian Summit needs to address these direct needs in an appropriate manner. Given the banner at the conference website (as depicted below) the sense of urgency is certainly felt in the humanitarian community. However, should the same sense of urgency not be present with those responsible for the rapid depletion of natural resources causing a global tragedy of the commons? Public policy and private capacity It is therefore very timely that the Dutch government has made funds available for advocacy by civil society towards both public and private parties, as changes should primarily come from these two domains. However, even if the social contract between governments and their citizens is strengthened, will citizens prioritize long-term goals over short-term needs? An activist in public life may turn out a pragmatist when it comes to personal choices. Does the social contract also function the other way around? Will modern citizens accept measures that will infringe on their freedom obtained through modernity itself? First a new type of global consciousness should emerge which inspires and shapes a new economic order, not based on economic growth but based on well-being of people and the desire to steward this planet responsibly for the next generations to live. The profit objective should either be completely transformed into social and ecological benefits or taken out of the equation altogether when measuring business success. Multiplying impact should be the next generation of economic models allowing for an 'ecolomy' of social and ecological impact investment, with citizens and consumers valuing natural capital, zero-waste solutions and ecosystem services performed on their behalf. Or as Feike Sijbesma of DSM put it: "I don't like to think of Philantropic CEOs, we need to think different about business". Ministers of Finance The usual 'solutions' governments and their cabinets have to their disposal are shifts in budget allocation, marking new priorities. However, who shapes these priorities? A countries' income may partly be derived from exploitating a countries natural resource base, not necessarily backed up by a proper social contract. Hence the influence of national states on the exploitation of natural resources needs to be reduced or at least brought under citizen control and be part of the ecolomy, in support of social and ecological development. In the academic world this will require intensive cross-disciplinary research directly linked to ongoing policies and practices with a strong normative framework derived from global commitments on combatting climate change. Civil society is best positioned to bring these vdarious perspectives together and maximise synergies between public and private actors. In order to civil society take this middle ground, NGOs should let go of some of their implementation capacity or turn these project based delivery systems into social enterprises, modeling alternative business models to the private sector. Instead they can stay focussed on their key-role, reconnecting formal and informal economies to public socio-economic or green investment policies. For this to happen, they need to substantially increase their advocacy and policy influencing efforts and may require to strengthen their capacities to do so. Knowledge of each of the three domains (public policy, private investment and informal economies) is important to be a good broker between the three of them. Capacity Strengthening for Advocacy Do capacity strengthening for advocacy and effective lobby go hand in hand? Clara Bosco of CIVICUS argued on Vice Versa that they hardly go together. However, that is exactly what is expected by civil socoiety organizations that partner with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in supporting their peers in developing countries to take on this new role. From implementer of projects to advocating for inclusive programming that adheres to international norms and standards. For effective lobby you would normally go for the strongest partner, best positioned to take the issue forward. Capacity strengthening would aim at weaker civil society players. Also here an inclusive approach is required. Stronger NGOs can take weaker NGOs along in a process of awareness raising and in a practice that increasinly requires citizens, governments and private industries to take their responsibility and account for impacts on climate and vulnerable groups. The capacity to relate and collaborate may turn out the most important ones in taking care of our planet. When I left for Mali last week, I could not have imagined how the events of the past week would unfold. Quite prepared for code orange I traveled to Bamako. On Monday afternoon an attack on Hotel Nord-Sud confirmed the need for code orange with a threat of it becoming red. The targeted hotel, where the European Military Training mission to Mali is housed, featured the whole evening on French and Mali television only te be replaced by reports on the attacks in Brussels next day.
Also featuring on Dutch television in the past week was the recent violence in Oromiya region in Ethiopia. An angry mob turned a Dutch farm into ashes, reason being that the land was provided to the investor by the Ehtiopian government whereas the community considered these lands communal grazing lands. The direct cause of the violence were the plans of the Ethiopian government to expand the fast growing urban area of Addis Ababa into Oromiya territory. The underlaying resentment has grown over the last twenty years that bear witness to a tense relationship between the federal administration and regional groupings, like the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF). Was it coincidence that also this week the OLF and four groups from other regions had their first gathering of the Peoples’ Alliance for Freedom and Democracy (PAFD) in Asmara, the capital of Eritrea, arch-enemy of the Ethiopian government? A bit odd they chose Asmara, given the bad track record of the oppressive Eritrean regime with regards to 'Freedom and Democracy'. Self-determination So what drives these groups into each other's arms and seeking convening power from a relentless dictatorial regime? Reviewing the resolution of their first congress held last week the answer is clear: self-determination. The five groups from Benishangul, Gambella, Ogaden, Oromiya and Sidama regions apparently join hands in a collective effort to achieve self-determination. During the elections in 2005 the opposition groups named themselves Coalition for Democratic Unity. It appears that unity is no longer the objective. In a country with over 80 different ethnolinguistic groups one can imagine what this would mean in terms of stability, governance and economic opportunity. A disintegrated Ethiopia won't offer the best perspective for the Dutch and other foreign investors, who share the benefit of a single window service provision through the current political leadership, providing them access to important resources to run their businesses successfully. The backlash in Oromiya teaches these investors an important lesson. You cannot play cards without involving all the players. I know of at least one case where a Dutch investor first reached an agreement with the local community before entering into an agreement with the Ethiopian government. His neighbour went the other way around. The first case lasted longer and the business was finally handed back to the community, with local employees taking over the farm in a proper business deal. Where the social contract is as thin as in Ethiopia, an important pre-condition for setting up a sustainable business is to allow local communities also to further their individiual and collective interests. Companies could benefit from the insights Dutch NGOs have to offer in this regard, being connected to their Ethiopian counterparts. Exclusion The Ethiopian case only serves to illustrate that excluding important stakeholders, soon or late invites for violence and radicalism. Inclusive decision-making processes are a pre-condition for longer-term growth and prosperity. Whether it concerns water management in the inner Niger delta in Mali; access to jobs for youth in specific neighbourhoods in Brussels; or European migration policies aiming at keeping people out rather than protecting them. Trying to exclude people will only cause them turning against you while you will be counted with those you have done business with. People peacefully co-exists where they are willing and able to share what they have in common and respect each others histories and traditions as well as universal human rights. The latter is often a challenge, since histories and traditions may cause nations or groups not to ratify certain agreements or request exemptionary clauses before signing them. If we want to reach concensus, we will have to learn to live with a certain measure of ambiguity and tolerance for minority perspectives as long as it does not infringe upon rights and freedom of others to make their own choices. This Easter weekend the bloodiest attack was commited on innocent women and children in Pakistan, displaying the barbarism that desperate minds will turn to when no other perspective is left but to die in a 'glorious' manner while taking hundreds of innocent lives along. The only appropriate answer to such deep rooted hatred will be a message of love and compassion. At least for all those who seek shelter against such gruesome acts! I feel ashamed to see Christians in Pakistan continuing to express messages of hope in the face of despair following the example of Jesus Christ on the cross who prayed: "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing". I sense he also prayed that prayer with foresight for us in Europe today. In the last couple of weeks I have been reading the new book by Paul Verhaege about Authority. In this second book he describes the decline of patriarchal structures in western societies that we are experiencing in many ways. He argues that this poses a challenge in terms of a vacuum in authority. Working for a program that actually tries to influences authorities for the betterment of people and planet I just wonder whether we are betting on the wrong horse. I don't think Paul Verhaege is just one soul searching for rest and stable and peaceful futures. Today many are on the run for conflict and both natural and men-made disasters. And stable economies today could soon collapse if not sufficiently anchored in stable societies. While contemplating this it is once again understood that society gains its strengthe from social configurations and relationships, not from institutions rooted in traditions that society no longer accepts as the norm. When patriarchal relationships are increasingly challenged and in practice already replaced by matriarchal configurations, how will authorities be reconfigured? What determines authority and how does it shape advocacy programming addressing inequality and aiming for social change. Authority Verhaege makes an interesting distinction between authoritarian and totalitarian leadership. What today is seen as authoritarian (due to its connotation with patriarchal structures) should actually be called totalitarian as (Verhaege following an essay by Hannah Arendt, 1954) authority you cannot possess on your own, it is provided by others on the basis of a common frame of reference. Likewise, when doing advocacy work we may do this towards political leadership on the bases of them having to live up to human rights conventions and international agreements on the one hand and their population on the other. We do that often on behalf of those who cannot speak for themselves (like other creatures and marginalized people). However, with a lot of international legislation lacking enforcement mechanisms, it is clear that governments make decisions also based on geopolitical consideration or military power, and much less on the basis of international norm setting. This is why the UN is often perceived as a teethless tiger. Nevertheless, in the face of diminishing power of the sovereign state and increasing mobility of its citizenry, people vote with their feet. Rather than standing up to totalitarian regimes it is left to the international community to remove bad leadership and install democratic structures. However, with discenting voices and enlightened brains having left, one can imagine how democracy takes shape, as witnessed by Egyptians recent history. Corporate governance So, with the demise of structures and authorities based on a democratic state model that no longer seems to deliver, what will replace it? We see decentralisation to the local and centralisation to the supranational happening at the same time. Governance is being decentralised whereas the private sector is increasingly interconnected. This has a liberating impact on the markets who no longer are controlled by national governing structures and regulatory environments and de-facto take over the global regulatory framework. So if global governance basically shifted to the corporate sector, where did authority go? Did it travel along? Will the business experience of Donald Trump outweigh the people experience of Hillary Clinton? As secretary of state Hillary Clinton already pinpointed to a powerful force that can stand-up against businesses: "Leading through Civil Power" was the title of her first Quadriannial review in 2007. She understood her time as soon we saw the Arab world collapse through people power. However, with a small enlightened urban middle class you do not win elections as was proven after Muslim Brotherhood was voted into power. And those who saw their business interest vanish took charge and removed the Muslim Brotherhood agains based on their bad decision-making which affected their business interest. So for whom did power power deliver? If military rule is able to allow broad participation in the national economy, It may sustain for years, and people will prefer stability over democratic fragility. Deliberative polls In such contexts, what is really needed is a fully decentralized decision-making with regard to policy formulation and implementation. A situation where policy is formulated much closer to peoples influence. A decrease of state-monopoly over policy through empowered citizenship. What politicians often do is trying to organize referenda while campaigning for their viewpoint to be adopted by the electorate. However, this is pseudo participation, like in the case of the Association Agreement with Ukraine. How in the world can empowered citizens be asked to vote a simple yes or no. What is needed is much more information about what the association agreement actually is all about. What will it bring to Ukraine and what will it bring to Europe? On what basis has this agreement be reached? And many more questions may service. Verhaege brings to the fore an experiment in Texas on energy supply with a deliberative poll amonst a representative panel from amongst the total population of the state. The result was to be binding. Today Texas is number two in wind energy and 84 percent of the population was willing to pay more for their energy compared to 43 percent before. People need enought information and time to deliberate with one another about the pros and cons. Their opinion should really matter and should have a realistic impact on policy. As a result you will witness a curious phenomena. People will be able to prioritize public over private benefits. This way of public consultation was designed by James Fishkin from Stanford University and has since been replicated in various occassions. Whenever they were combined with a referendum it never lead to any result. It should be about fully informed consent or opposition rather than popular votes and media-coverage. Dialogues So, what should advocacy be about in a couple of years from now. Not necessarily helping citizens raise their voices towards national governments who increasingly will be perceived as middle-men between industry and people. Rather investing in information sharing and networking, getting the conversation going and make all stakeholders participate, increasingly the corporate sector. Supporting governments in organizing deliberative dialogues. Not beating politicians during election time, but helping them to improve their public consultation practice and ensure that every voice counts. Not in elections but by developing alternative narratives that help authorities to deriving their power and influence from third party endorsement that are recognized and understood by the general public. Social media savy Social media can be an important driver. However, given the vested interest of multinationals by influencing them to their advantage, even face to face meetings may need to be prioritized. As far as digiatel exchange is concerned, youth will need to outsmart the so called 'authorities' that will attempt to capture that public space. They can do so by constantly inventing new solutions and new ways to communicate effectively with one another. As I was clearly told by my daughters that SnapChat was certainly not something adults should even attempt to entertain. It is to be their domain and they wish no adult interference. What can I do..? Listen to divergent voices. Stay rooted in values that recognize dignity of people and integrity of the planet and live my life in a way that does not compromise these values. Every system change starts with one particle moving into another direction influencing other particals in their vicinity. Likewise I am being influenced by the likes of Verhaege who invested time to bring new perspectives to the surface or dig up half forgotten truths. Hope I will never stop listening and recognize that there are alternative pathways worth following. When the travelers reach a critical mass, it will be difficult to stop them for better or worse. The Dutch government, in a letter to the parliament of 9 oktober 2013, valued the contribution of civil society organisations in implementing its aid, trade and investment agenda's. "The role civil society should play is to inform policies through dialogue and expressing dissent when needed". Last Tuesday, February 9, the Ministry of Foreign Affaris invited Danny Sriskandarajah, Secretary General of CIVICUS, to inform the audience about CIVICUS' role in the Dialogue and Dissent strategic partnerships as the 26th partner of the Ministry. Five years ago I facilitated a visit of CIVICUS to the Netherlands in the context of collective learning of civil society organisations at the start of the previous co-financing scheme. CIVICUS attempted to measure the strength of civil society and their Civil Society Index was referenced in the policy framework linked to the co-funding facility. Seeing a clamp down on civil society globally due to restrictive regulatory environment, increasing power of corporates over states and weakening of the social contract between citizens and their governments, CIVICUS invented the Civil Society Index and did a series of country studies. CIVICUS also publishes an annual State of Civil Society Report. Strategic Partner Having a global constituency and the above knowledge body in place, CIVICUS has managed to turn their relationship with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs into a strategic partnership within the funding framework "Dialogue and Dissent". For the Ministry it was clear that CIVICUS provided an important international space for learning with regard to the enabling environment for lobby and advocacy called civil society. However, unlike in the previous round, the CSI was not specifically promoted. Instead CIVICUS was invited to present to the 25 other strategic partners a number of tools and offered a convening space for country panels of some 300 experts, which could be consulted on a number of topics in due time but would primarily be used to evaluate the enabling environment for civil society at a regular interval. Though the Ministry went out of its way to emphasize that participation was not obligatory in any way, it is clear that offering the opportunity for CIVICUS to tap into the networks of these strategic partners will provide them access to a wealth of information, but ! .... within the boundaries of Dutch policy priorities. And this is where the math does not add up. A closer look at the policy letter "Dialogue and Dissent" may help to uncover this. The letter in itself is a brilliant piece in bringing out the critical role of civil society. It rightly states that civil society operates at the interface between state, market and citizens. However, what if a state does not deliver for its citizens and just controls the market for individual gain? The policy letter articulates a clear role for CSOs to "effectively voice alternative or dissenting views in dynamic and increasingly global context." To materialize this the Minister supports the strengthening of the lobbying and advocacy capacity of local Civil Society Organisations. To do so the Ministry has entered into a strategic partnership relation with Dutch civil society organizations, requiring "respect for each other's independent roles and responsiblities" while "identifying opportunities for joint, complementary action to effectively advocate change and influence policy." "Civil society organisations operate at the interface between state, citizens and market." The policy letter continues: "This type of relationship demands a critical attitude among the partners. By voicing differences, partners keep each other focused. Agreements are to be formulated in general terms, leaving scope for variations and adaptations, in the interests of flexibility and the ability to respond quickly to new developments. This also implies that partners will take risks together."
This sounds very promising and very daring from a governance point of view, and in some ways it really is. However, as always, the devil is in the detail: "A strategic partnership is made up of the Minister and one or more CSOs (or a consortium) working together in pursuit of a common strategic goal (...). This goal must be in keeping with the Minister's broad-based agenda on foreign trade and development." Dependency syndrome The last sentence points to the achilles' heel of the funding framework. CSOs that partner with the government may be supportive to dialogue and dissent in partner countries of the Dutch government and within the confinement of the Dutch aid and trade agenda. The policy priorities, summarized in seven theories of change, do capture a significant part of Dutch engagement over the past decades (water, SRHR, gender, private sector development, food and nutrition, security and rule of law, climate change). However, the first breed of cofinancing instruments did not limit the scope of the cofinancing to a prescribed series of policy areas. This makes a lot of sense considering the functioning of civil society as a space where diversity is celebrated and even divergent views on policy priorities are common place, providing it the strength it needs to support sustainable development holistically, taking all perspectives into consideration. In a sense organizations availing their time and resources to become co-implementers and co-developers of government policies make themselves politically dependent on what a majority coalition would aim to do, creating a new dependency syndrome. One could argue that the current policy areas are very broad and could encompass almost any cause. However, take for instance basic health care and basic education. They have been taken out of the priority list of the Dutch development aid, and as a consequence no longer feature in the government sponsored programs for civil society engagement already for some time now. Obviously the chances for Dutch industries on foreign soils may not directly improve by investing in health and education. Dutch Disease In the seventies the Dutch discovered gas reserves in their soils. As the Dutch were starting to exploit these reserves, their currency (the guilder), became stronger. However, the social-democrats were accused of investing the profits from this reserve in extra social services. The rest of the export-industry in the meantime suffered from the strong guilder. This became known as the Dutch Disease. I am pretty sure that prioritizing some 'currency' is like a disinvestment in other 'currencies'. The typical Dutch civil society engagement with high concern for health and education outcomes has suffered from widespread depreciation. The recent strategy to invest millions in lobbying and advocacy capacity of local civil society may be applauded in its attempt to re-establish the social contract between governments and its citizens through improved taxation systems and strengthening countervailing power. However, with the lobbying agenda confined to Dutch policy priority areas, some other, possibly more critical, areas may be forgotten. One would argue that the recent proces in getting to the sustainable development goals somehow ensures a comprehensive global policy agenda with phrases like 'leave no one behind' featuring in the language. But what mechanism will ensure that local priorities are respected rather than donor priorities and wish-lists that align better with donor policies than with local realities in allocating funds and implementing programs? Migrants may help turn the tide Recent migrant inflows into Europe seem to turn the tide and (vocational) education regains momentum in budgets for humanitarian aid, like in the MADAD program of the European Commission. Donors have realised that education has been ignored as young graduates are looking for jobs but cannot find them. At the same time epidemics are driving people out of vulnerable areas towards areas where better health services are provided. Would you not do the same? So what if Dutch civil society agencies were left to pick and choose their own causes and independent choice in connection with their target group and constituencies? It would certainly help redirect current funding for lobbying and advocacy towards the direct needs of local communities, which may evolve around health service and education provisions. Should such 'dissenting' priority not have been permitted, even when funded with government subisidies? It would have allowed civil society organizations to remain trustworthy partners towards their counterparts in developing countries, rather than having to align their programming with donor policies including the demands for matching funds. Unfortunately rather the opposite is happening given the recent move of the British government to include phrases in contracts requiring CSOs not to lobby against government policies with tax payers' money. This seems to me a sign of a weakening democratic order. A healthy democracy is willing and able to even finance its own countervailing power. Still a dialogue could be nurtured with government about their priorities, but priorities of 'Northern' CSOs at least would not change over night when the political landscape changes in donor countries like in the Netherlands when the liberals took office and (with help of the Christian Democrats) undressed Dutch development aid. Hope they have realised in the meantime that the Dutch Disease may also play up for development when suddenly trade is prioritised over aid. This year started with the demise of a great singer-songwriter David Bowie. It was clear that he did not want his departure to go unnoticed. This was true for his lifetime as well, adopting various identities to bring marginalized groups to the fore. He probably realized you only die once, and turned it into a piece of art that has astonished many. What got to me was the image of him holding a book, which looked like a heavily used bible, with a black-star on the cover. It represented his gospel of total freedom which was mirrored by his life choices. It occurred to me, everyone lives by a certain gospel. A message of good news. In times of transition such as ours, a new gospel may be required more than ever. When PSO, the demised Dutch expert organization for capacity development of civil society, was about to close its doors, it published a series of success stories on innovation. Various innovative learning modalities were developed at PSO that received an excellent uptake with civil society organizations. PSO invested in collective learning processes like that of the Community of Practice on Migration and Development. Ironically enough, the heading of the final document read "Don't miss the boat". The irony speaks in various ways. Many refugees do not want to miss the boat today. At the same time the international community does not have the ideas nor the capacity to create an 'Ark of Noah' for bringing people into safe waters away from war or create the right conditions for them to remain on shore away from conflict areas. Momentum At the time PSO actually missed the boat in failing to grasp the momentum. Several transitions were already ongoing, aid and trade agenda's were combined and fragile states and migration had come up as important thematic areas and joint learning processes were successfully initiated and communities of practice formed. How come PSO was not able to use this momentum and continue delivering on these important learning agenda's? Today the proceeds of these collective learning programs would have made excellent input into programs that are currently hastily designed to deal with the huge case load of refugees and remain vigilant in fragile contexts. I belief PSO failed to formulate a new gospel that would address the capacity challenges at the time in an effective manner. On a positive note: many NGOs still maintain learning agenda's and have joint learning programs as part of their capacity development interventions: self-organized learning, peer-2-peer review systems; multi-stakeholder processes and a realist approach to evaluation acknowledging complexity while addressing attribution challenges are all results from this eagerness to learn amongst NGOs. Capacity development Today I sat together with knowledge organizations and a variety of other actors involved in building capacities for education and knowledge systems organized by PIE and EP-Nuffic. The assumption that universities may be best placed to build capacities of other universities may be questioned. Actually, while working with a university I experienced first hand how capacity development of universities in developing economies was not perceived as bringing much value to the primary process. However the possible outcomes of these interventions in terms of improved connectivity to universities abroad and as deliverables on the internationalization agenda for various disciplines recently gained some traction. This will be the frame to embrace in holistic capacity development. The realization that always two blades sharpen each other creating win-wins is gradually winning territory in the development landscape. Charity or reciprocity Some institutional realities still prefer a charity perspective to capacity development with a recipient and provider perspective. I hope this frame will soon be replaced by the rightful claim for reciprocity and interdependency that acknowledges outcomes at both sides of the partnership equation, even if the primary aim of the intervention from the donor perspective remains building local capacity. Capacity development could then deliver for the frontiers of finance, economic affairs, home and foreign affairs (including humanitarian aid, safety and security and asylum policies) and made part of the internationalization agenda of educational institutions. I bet this new gospel already counts a number of followers within the line Ministries following recent initiatives by Mrs. Ploumen, our Dutch Minister for Aid and Trade, to engage with other colleagues in the cabinet and their line Ministries in delivering on international commitments. Please pray for more converts so that their numbers will increase and policy coherence achieved. This will be an important pre-condition for effectively pulling together public and private forces and resources to protect the public goods and deliver on the sustainable development goals. |
About meMy name is Reinier van Hoffen. U®ReadingClick here for a summary.
Also find the text of a lecture Dr. Achterhuis held at the 2012 Bilderberg conference. Archives
August 2022
|
AddressNachtegaallaan 26
Ede, the Netherlands |
Telephone+31 (0)6 1429 1569
|
info@uraide.nl
|