MFTF                             IERD TASKFORCE                  February l984                                                                                                   

Jaipur

IERD FRAME - PERFORMANCE, LEARNINTS, GAPS & PHASE III ANTICIPATIONS

Sub-Continent

Our purpose in having co­sponsors was to achieve credibility and authorisation, nationally and internationally, and to secure such influences and resources as we could.

We asked the Advisory Boards (GAB/IAB) to support us in the setting up of NSCs and to give us ad hoc advice with our frame. While no commitment was made relative to the provision of funds, it was our hope that some moneys would flow from these sources.

ANALYSIS OF GAB AND IAB

(175 people: GAB 151. IAB 24)

        GEOGRAPHY               % (approx.)             SECTOR          % (approx.)
        Europe                          22              NGO and Social          39
        North America           19              Private Sector                  27
        Asia/Pacific                    15              Govt. (inc 8%
        Latin America                   15              politicos)                      22
        India                           1               International
        Africa                          8               Agencies                        8
        UN.                             7               Unions/Co­ops           3
        Mid­East                        2     102%                                            99%

CO­SPONSORS

The co­sponsors are:

International Council of Women (ICW) 
United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) 
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 
United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA) 
World Health Organisation (WHO) 
Agricultural Finance Corporation (AFC) 
Association of Indian Engineering Industry (AIEI) 
Canara Bank

HAPPENINGS ­ PRACTICAL SUPPORT FROM THE CO­SPONSORS AND SUPPORTING ORGANISATIONS

The Administrator of the UNDP, Bradford Morse, authorised Resident Representatives around the world to "claw back" indicative planning funds so that delegates to the CIE could be sponsored. Unfortunately, a coincidental 40% reduction in funds diminished the effect of this manoeuvre. UNDP, while not providing central funding, nevertheless locally assisted financially and in negotiations with governments, particularly in Latin America; but in Thailand, Philippines, and Haiti has set up meetings with UN agencies, governments and NGOs. In the case of Nigeria, the UNDP funded, in rupees, the equivalent of the accumulated but blocked Naira currency. They supported the IRDS in New York and Geneva and helped to sponsor a RDS in Korea. UN agencies including the UNDP sponsored six delegates from Nepal.

UNICEF produced an exhibit at the CIE and were represented by a full­time participant from India. The Indian representative addressed a CIE plenary; Taizie Vittachi, Deputy Executive Director, has been consistently supportive. $30,000 was provided for international set­up costs. They paid some delegates fees. e.g. for Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Korea and Mexico. In some locations they provided introductions and secretarial assistance.

UNFPA through its Executive Director, Raphael Salas, provided $30,000 and supported delegates from a number of countries.

The International Council of Women invited all its national affiliates to participate. Four women from Pakistan and one from Turkey did take part. The ICW President, Dame Miriam Dell, from New Zealand, participated fully in the Central Event, as a speaker and as a team member.

Of the Indian co­sponsors, Canara Bank advanced moneys on loan to the ICAI at strategic periods and assisted with the holding of a press conference.

The Agricultural Finance Corporation helped us with personnel, accommodations and transport in the context of various rural development symposia, provided some funds, set­up a press conference and sent one CIE facilitator

The Association of Indian Engineering Industry lent their name, provided mailing lists and addressed envelopes.
Assistance was forthcoming from a number of supportive organisations.

World Bank sent two delegates, one of which attended throughout the CIE.

DANIDA (Danish International Development Authority) provided $50,000 for
international costs and paid the fees of at least six delegates.

CIDA (Canadian) gave $50,000 for set­up costs and paid some Canadian fares
and fees for Third World delegates.

SIDA (Swedish) paid delegate fees for some Third World delegates and
provided a delegate from their own organisation.

NORAD (Norwegian) paid delegate fees for at least one Third World
delegate.

Australian Development Aid Bureau (ADAB) paid a number of Third World
delegate fees.

The Netherlands Embassy paid two Bangledeshi fees.

The Commonwealth Foundation paid the fees of delegates from five
Commonwealth countries.

FAO provided transport, office services, ministerial and other government
contacts.

UNESCO funded a delegate from Mexico.

ILO sent ~ trade unionists from Indonesia, also paid one Filipino, three
Pakistani and five Indian fees.

Ford Foundation paid one and a half fees for Egypt, five for Black Africa,
one for Jordan, one for Honduras and two for the USA.

The American University paid one half fee in Egypt.

Tate and Lyle paid one fee in London.

Reynolds Tobacco paid two fees in Hong­Kong and co­sponsored an RDS.

Metal Box paid five fees in Nigeria.

Guinea's Ambassador in Paris enabled participation.

West German government funded one German delegate.

German Foundation for International Development sent one delegate and paid
for one Third World fee. ;

Three German NGOs agreed to pay for one Indian delegate.

Belgian government supported one delegate.

British Council provided some fee support.

Four Japanese government ministries endorsed the RDS.

Association for the Production of International Cooperation (APIC of
Japan) produced three fees.

The government of Sri Lanka sent the Home Secretary as delegate.

Philippines Rural Reconstruction Movement (PREM)and Project Compassion
each sponsored one delegate. 

Happening sponsored four delegates from Sri Lanka and two from Malaysia.

Strong four sector support throughout the USA included state governments
and universities.

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) sent one delegate.

Supporting Organisations assisted as follows:

Four ministries of the Government of India authorised the CIE; the Vigyan
Shavan was made available for the opening event. Support was given by a
;= number of ministers and officials, in particular by Vasant Satha, Minister
of Chemicals and Fertilizers (who gave the inaugural address), the
Planning MInister, S.B. Chavan and Dr. M.S.S. Swaminathan and Prof. M~G.K.
Mannon, of the Planning Commission.

The Governor of West Bengal convened the Calcutta RDS. The Rural
Development Secretary of the Union Government gave the keynote talk at the
Delhi RDS. The Rural Development Secretary of Madya Pradash inaugurated
the RDS there. The speaker of the Tamil Nadu legislature inaugurated the
Madras RDS. The government of Rajasthan and Haryana supported RDSs. The
government of Uttar Pradesh hosted a field visit.

The government finance corporations interested in rural industry (ICICI,
IDBI, and IFC) provided financial support. From the private sector,
funding was received from Tata, Modi, Mafatlal, Kirkloskar and other
companies.

The Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry (ASSOCHAM) and the
Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) gave
significant help in setting up Rural Development Symposia in various parts
of India.

A number of State Governments, banks, some NGOs, companies, educational
establishments and the Ramakrishna Mission sponsored Rural Development
Symposia.

LEARNINGS

We have pulled together the following [earnings from our experience with the co­­sponsors, advisors and supporting organisations: ~ The influence and potential help of co­sponsors should not be underestimated; they may well be interested in active engagement. Some co­sponsors are now ready to engage in Phase III work, but will need thorough briefing. The same co­sponsoring agencies may respond differently in different countries. It is important in each country to look for the individuals in the agency that you can work with

The UN agencies' need of links with the local may provide useful opportunities for cooperation.

 The ability of the UN agencies to help in a particular country will depend on its government's attitudes.
 
In the headquarters of UN agencies it is necessary to maintain contact with middle level as well as the top.

Experience with the International Council of Women illustrated that NGOs can move faster and more dynamically than the official agencies.

Often GAB response has been passive and primarily assisted in public image, but there are many examples of active support, including financial, promotional, introductions, etc., though follow through is difficult.

Meetings with individuals rather than groups were often the most productive operating mode. Without adequate methods, meetings were often unproductive.

Long­term relationships are required for effective work with government institutions.

UN agencies may be easier to work with if our requests are logical and straight forward.

In many cases, UNDP offices were very helpful in communication, set­up and ; logistics but, as with other UN agencies, cash is hard to get unless it is built into their budget.

NSC meetings based in only one urban area in larger nations, such as India, Indonesia, Mexico, without funds to bring other members, means active NSC will only consist of people in that urban area.

There has been relative ease in some cases for governments to raise money from UN agencies, i.e. Ghana.

The Agricultural Finance Corporation produced a great programmatic network in Northern India.

There is much to be developed in Switzerland with multi­lateral agencies and Swiss­based industries related to rural development.

The Marshall Islands are hard to reach by phone, but personal contact is critical to achieve action.

In African countries keep close to rural, community and women's development, accessing other women's groups for Phase III activities.

Korean GAB member gave us our Nepal entrees.

We need to extend our frame to bring additional influence and resources to bear on Phase III and, more generally, to accelerate the implementation process.

CO­SPONSORS

Examples of additional co­sponsorship that we should seek to obtain are:

­International Chamber of Commerce: an umbrella organisation which has a  Commission on Rural Development and on Training in Entrepreneurial Skills in Third World Countries. If they were co­sponsors they would influence the private sector worldwide towards Phase III implementation support. ACTION: in their Paris HQ and with F. van den Hoven, their incoming President (who chairs Unilever NV and Ltd).

International Labour Organisation. This is the only UN body with a multisectoral constituency (government, employees, employers). Its major interest is human resource development. It is now involved in rural development with an emphasis on employment policies.  ILO paid fees for eight CIE delegates, and in principle, are interested in working more closely with us.  ACTION: principally in Geneva, but liaison at a national level may be fruitful.

FAO (Food and Agriculture Organisation), have granted us Liaison Status and have already been helpful with Pakistan and contracts in other countries.  They expect us to develop closer working relationships with them, particularly through their Human Resource Division (Mr. Newiger). This could lead to closer relations with the German Foundation for International Development. ACTION: in Rome, Frankfurt).

IFAD (International Foundation for Agricultural Development). The Vice President of this OECD-backed agency, Mr. Hartax Asitz, has expressed real interest in the IERD, but nothing practical has emerged.  Even if we cannot achieve their co-sponsorship, we should engage their interest for Phase III. ACTION: Rome.

As regards our co-sponsor WHO, we now have working relations with them.  Up to now, this has been solely in a Phase I/II context.  For Phase III we need to build up our relationship with programmes run by Dr. Hammad. ACTION: in Geneva and Delhi.

Indian Co-Sponsors.  Before the CIE we were unable to identify a suitable NGO umbrella organisation.  If this could now be done, we should seek such co-sponsorship if that would further Phase III implementation.  ACTION: in India.
   
ADVISORS

If we are to pursue Phase III effectively in non-resident countries, we shall need to recruit Global Advisors there, e.g. Turkey.  We need a mew GAB member in Pakistan following the resignation of "our" minister from the government. ACTION: decision in Brussels.

To help us build up in Eastern Europe, the Hungarians seem willing to help us consolidate in Hungary and to introduce us to Poles and Hungarians who might lead us to Global Advisor material in their countries.  ACTION: follow-up in Budapest.

Hong Kong  needs broader representation on the GAB, including the Chinese community.  ACTION: in Hong Kong.

Italy needs the government to be represented in the GAB.  ACTION: in Rome.

The Sri Lankan frame need  broadening, preferably to include a minister or the vice president in the GAB.  ACTION: by Madras

An example of a global advisor who may bring influence/resources to bear on Phase III implementation if the Right Honorable John Freeman (ex-minister, Labour; previously the UK Excellency in Delhi and Washington; ex­editor of the New Statesman). He joined the Board in November when he was Chairman of London weekend television. His television contacts will be valuable, and he has agreed to be our first patron on the new Village Volunteers Scheme (indigenous volunteers initially in Indonesia, India, Jamaica, Kenya, and Zambia). ACTION: in all Nexi.

SUPPORTING ORGANISATIONS

OECD Centre for Development and the OECDs Development Advisory Committees
(DAC). Ann Avery's contacts within the OECO should be followed up; ACTION: in
Paris.

UNESCO So should Ann's contacts with this agency which may be persuaded to fund  documenion. They already have participated by putting up a book display at the CIE. ACTION: in Paris.

European Economic Community (EEC) We need to recreate our frame in the European Commission. ACTION; in Brussels.

SIDA has not been supporting us from Stockholm, nor has

NORAD from Oslo. They should both be persuaded. ACTION: in Stockholm and Oslo.

SWISSAE­D will now be worth following up. ACTION in Lausanne.

International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED): The president, William Clark, is a GAB member hut the IIED has yet to respond to the IERD. However, Mr. Richard Sandbrook, vice president, attended the CIE, as a full­time delegate, and contributed usefully to the funding day. This group is
in touch with 200 editors around the world and needs to be pressed for a positive response in support of Phase III. ACTION: in London.

Overseas Development Agency (ODA): The British government aid agency (which has done nothing to date except appoint an NSC member who promptly retired from the civil service and was not replaced) should be approached again, at the level of the Minister preferably; if not, the Permanent Secretary. ACTION: in
London.

Arab League may be worth pursuing. ACTION: see Mrs. Hadja, phone 611310 in Delhi, and Mr. E1 Said in Paris.

Other National Supporting Organisations: There are a number of governments
with aid programmes. It will be worthwhile identifying these in every country
in which we are now working. ACTION: in all OECD and OPEC nations;
particularly in Bonn and the Hague.

We have yet to engage seriously the private sector in many nations. Companies should be much more interested in Phase III implementation programmes than in supporting what was often perceived as "just another international conference". We might approach corporations directly, through Chambers of
Commerce, industrial, or commercial associations. Another route for getting at businesses is through service clubs such as Rotary, Lions, Jaycees, etc.

Funding Agencies Ford, the World Bank are mentioned under Anticipations. Qther funding NGOs need to be identified and approached to support Phase III programmes, not forgetting those located in the Netherlands. ACTION: Nexi, particularly Brussels.

GOVERNMENTS

Quite apart from the funding and GAB approaches suggested above, Phase III should provide an opportunity for government framing in Third World countries, particularly the ministries concerned with the different aspects of rural development and those with which the Institute is registered or depends upon for visas.

ANTICIPATIONS FOR PHASE III
Taking into account our report this far, the following is an attempt to indicate, from what came out of our group and the questionnaire returns ­ what are reasonable expectations from Co­Sponsors, Advisors, and Supporting Organisations, and all other aspects of our frame. These anticipations may be as follows:

a considerably increased use of the International Council of Women's network, e.g. in France assistance will be offered to ICW for publishing reports on IERD. In Pakistan, ICW follow­up will be useful. Also in interesting other women's organisations. e.g. UK.

requests for help with other organisations' interchange processes, for example: ­with the 1986 conference on "Challenge of World Poverty Towards the Year 2000" sponsored by FAI and the DSE (The Gerffian Foundation for International Development). It is written up elsewhere as a MFTF report. ­following the presentation of the CIE report, we may help Bangladesh with their interchange process. ­in Brazil, UNICEF and UNDP plan to participate in Interchange Forums and GAB members plan to involve their organisations in Interchange Forums ­Egypt will work with American University and Ford Foundation to bring together NGOs. ­In Italy, interchange with FAO and with religious orders.

The Phase III reporting and follow­up programmes should be helpful in building
our frame.

UNDP can continue to be the umbrella under which we focus Phase III.

The French film will be a tool for follow­up in francophone Africa, still weak
In its frame.

THERE ARE POSSIBILITIES OF:

A consultative status with UNESCO in France and with the UN's Department of Technical Cooperation for Development (Mrs. M. Anstee) in New York

Work with IHO and ILO on village development in India

Continued work with companies and foundations in places such as India and Hong Kong

Indian State government's funding Phase III, e.g. Karnataka

Rotary's participation in Phase III in Latin America, particularly in Colombia

Contractual relationships with government agencies for training programmes or joint ventures with government agencies such as the Government and Saemaul Undong in Korea, the Ministry of Education in Venezuela, and several government departments in Taiwan

Working with the Institute for Agricultural Research, Budapest

National and regional symposia with agencies and projects to pursue Phase III and create a funding base for rural development in the Philippines.

Many development community seminars in Northeastern Europe, some with funding possibilities for Africa and India

Cooperation with UN­funded projects in Peru, a training contract with the UNFPA, and a programme contract with Andean Pact administration

Further funding meetings and IERD symposia, e.g. New York

CIDA support of Third World projects

Impacting members of the Canadian Parliament, key figures in government and
business

Pushing harder on the government and private sectors if we go along with a strong voluntary sector

Cooperation throughout Phase III with the Tonga National Council of Churches, Catholic Diocese Women's Development, Government's Central Planning Department and the Ministry of Health

Entrees to Sudan through Ford Foundation and Canadian Embassy; also Lindsay contacts in the Sudanese Civil Service

Programme opportunities in Papua­New Guinea, if we want them

An agency briefing in Nepal which will include ICA, other NGOs, CIE delegates, Agricultural Development Bank, Ministry of Panchayat and Local Development and Ministries of Health and Forestry

Getting UN Agency headquarters to influence or persuade­to­be­more­friendly their offices in Malaysia

Using Phase III to re­establish relationships in the Marshall Islands

Working further with companies in India involved in rural development

State Governments, e.g. Karnataka, funding Phase III activities in India

Involving the NSC in local programmes in India

Working with APIC in Japan regarding consultancy and future funding