________________________________________________________________________

Role of NGOs for Rural Development in Ethiopia – A case of Haramaya Woreda Integrated Rural Development Project by Self Help Development International

_______________________________________________

 

            

Paper prepared for the fifth International Conference on the Ethiopian Economy, Ethiopian Economic Association

June 2007

 

 

Submitted By:

 

  Mr. A.W. Unas

                Lecturer,

                Department of Management,

                Haramaya University, 

                Post Box No. 251, Haramaya.

                Mobile: 0915-751279

                Email:aw_unas@sancharnet.in

 

           Ato. Mulugeta Damie

                Lecturer,

                Department of Accounting

                Haramaya University,

                Mobile: 0915-740375

                  Email:mulied75@yahoo.com

               

           

               

 

               

         

 

 

                                                                              

 

                      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

 

Chapter          Title                                                                                        Page No.

 

1.                Executive Summary                                                                                 3

 

2.                Introduction                                                                                             4

 

3.                Rural Development- Concept and Approach                                           7

 

4.                Non-governmental organizations as agents of rural development           10

 

5.                Performance of SHDI for rural development in Haramaya Woreda    14

 

6.                Conclusion and implication                                                                    26

 

6.                 Bibliography                                                                                          28

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                            

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. Executive Summary

 

Rural development is a strategy designed to improve the socio-economic life of rural people with special emphasis on rural poor. It covers, output, employment, healthy education, transport, commerce, power supply and drinking water facilities in general and political and social awakening in particular. SHDI is an Irish development organization which was founded in 1984 in response to the Ethiopian famine of that time. Haramaya project started in 1997 while the second biannual of 1996 was the preparatory period for staffing and other resource mobilization. The project phases out in 2001.The total cost of the project was budgeted at 14.6 million Birr of which 86.2% was contributed by SHDI and the rest by the beneficiaries and Haramaya University.

 

Development can be defined as a process of improving the capability of a country’s institutions and value system to meet increasing and different demands of a social, cultural, political as well as an economic character. Thus the essence NGOs for rural development can be defined as autonomous, privately set up, non-profit-making institutions that support, manage or facilitate development actions.

 

The SHDI launched the different components which include crop production, livestock production, soil and water conservation, public health, education, rural water supply, women’s programme and training. Partners in this project are: local communities, Agriculture department (at woreda and zonal level), Health department (at woreda and zonal level), Education department (at woreda and zonal level), Water mines and Energy development department (at woreda and zonal level), Cooperative promotion, Haramaya University.

 

The SHDI achieved many stuff for the rural development of Haramaya Woreda and launched new programs without projects, plans and budgets especially in the area of construction of model latrines, construction of shallow wells, training program to staff and students of Haramaya University and conducted meetings and seminar on emergence of the rural development in the Woreda. Thus, the essence of SHDI is highly vital for the development of the Haramaya Woreda.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. Introduction

 

 

Best known of major rural development projects are Mexico’s PIDER program, Kenya’s KTDA, Ethiopia’s CADU scheme, India’s Panchayati Raj, and the Masagana 99 program in the Philippines.

                                                                                                                                                          Jon R. Moris (1981)

 

The term IRD no longer serves to identify a specific set of problems, nor does it suggest any distinct strategy.

                                                                                                          Overseas Development Institute (1979)

 

 

 

 

 

Rural development has assumed considerable significance particularly in seventies. It is a strategy designed to improve the socio-economic life of rural people with special emphasis on rural poor. It covers, output, employment, healthy education, transport, commerce, power supply and drinking water facilities in general and political and social awakening in particular. It has, therefore, been accorded top priority in recent plans. The emphasis is on the development of agriculture and allied activities like rural industries and crafts. It is generally accepted that non-governmental organization (NGOs) have become very important and implementation of development programs and projects.

 

The rural development project in Ethiopia called the Chilalo Agricultural Development Unit (CADU), later known by the acronyms ARDU and SEAD, is one of the oldest and best known projects supported by SIDA. Planning for the project started in the mid-1960s, Swedish support was initiated in 1967 and is still ongoing.

 

CADU was one of the first and also one of the best known examples of the integrated rural development approach tried in the 1960s and 1970s. From the outset it was designed to meet all or most of the needs of small farmers for raising the productivity. The project provided a wide range of different services from agricultural research to rural water supplies and from livestock breeding to rural road construction. It was designed as an autonomous entity outside of the local administration, though gradually it was incorporated into the Ministry of Agriculture.

 

This project offers examples of most of the possibilities, potentials, pitfalls and problems of integrated rural development projects. It has had several significant successes and some notable failures. To this day it can be cited as one of the most carefully planned rural development projects supported by SIDA. It offers a rich body of experience for the Ethiopian Government and for SIDA. From the outset its achievements have been documented in an exemplary fashion. Few projects have been so carefully monitors and evaluated.

 

The project has at times been highly controversial. This was the case in the early 1970s when the then Imperial Ethiopian Government was reluctant to implement a much-needed land reform and the Swedish Government was contemplating withdrawing its support. This has again been the case in recent years, at least in Sweden, due to the use of project resources to promote collectivization of agriculture.

 

Throughout the 1970s, integrated rural development was one of the most important development intervention strategies used by Third World governments and international aid agencies.  Despite a promising beginning, this approach toward increasing the agricultural productivity and quality of life of rural people is being seriously questioned. Unfortunately, the emerging critiques is being written by social scientists lacking detailed case studies of such projects and direct personal experience in the it design or implementation. Moreover, it is being articulated with little regard for conceptual rigor by donors wishing to back away from their own initial mistakes. Finally, many of the critics appear more eager to find newer strategies likely to capture the imaginations of the international aid community than to fairly test the strategy attacked.

 

Integrated rural development deserves a more enlightened critique based on detailed knowledge of how such projects functioned. Too many resources have been invested in this strategy to reject it one the basis of thin consulting reports and in-house donor evaluations. Too much accumulated but unrelieved project-related data has been generated to justify present tendencies of critics to reject the approach on the basis of superficial knowledge of troubled projects and deductive application of general principles from economics and public administration.

 

SHDI is an Irish development organization which was founded in 1984 in response to the Ethiopian famine of that time. The organization has started to operate in Haramaya Woreda of Eastern Hararghe Zone for Project I which involved for 15 peasant associations in 1996. The project-II was started in 2003 after the completion of the first project is still ongoing and it has involved 18 peasant associations which were not included in the first project. Both the completed and the ongoing projects of SHDI are aimed at developing women, increasing local food production and farm income, improving access to basic social services, and conserving natural resources of the area. The beneficiaries are 85.000 rural people of Haramaya Woreda under Project-I.

 

 As a result of high population pressure, erratic rainfall, poor cropping practices etc. the project intervention area remained food deficit for many years. The major development problems that attracted the project were low crop and livestock productivity, high level of natural resource degradation, low access to education, lack of human health care, lack of clean potable water, Low participation of women in development and low awareness of the community (lack of participation). The core objective of the project is:

 

“Sustainable agricultural development through increasing agricultural productivity and conserving the natural resources base, there by improving the livelihood of the rural population.”

 

The total cost of the project was budgeted at 14.6 million Birr of which 86.2% was contributed by SHDI and the rest by the beneficiaries and Haramaya University. Implementation of the project started in 1997 while the second biannual of 1996 was the preparatory period for staffing and other resource mobilization. The project phases out in 2001.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3. Rural Development- Concept, Approach and objectives    

                               

Since the Second World War the whole world has become developmental and plan minded as it was never before. Development through planning has become the major concern of the underdeveloped countries of the world and the developed countries also have been taking keen interest in this endeavor of the poorer counties. Most of the recent studies by social scientists as well as by physical scientists are by and large economic development and plan oriented. At a symposium on social policy and planning organized by the United Nations in 1970, a working definition of ‘Development’ was formulated as follow:

 

“Development can be defined as a process of improving the capability of a country’s institutions and value system to meet increasing and different demands of a social, cultural, political as well as an economic character.”

 

This definition rightly indicates that development has many facets. The reference to the demands is to be thought of in terms of the ‘quality of life’ of the people which in itself is rather difficult to be precisely defined. There is no absolute norm against which one can measure the ‘quality of life’. However, it may be said that gainful employment securing a derived balance between work and leisure, better and diversified consumption, preventing pollution and health hazards, healthier living conditions, attaining higher cultural levels are all undisputed elements in any measure of quality of life.

 

Thus, development in its comprehensive and real sense must refer to an improvement in the ‘quality of life’ of the people in all its inter-related aspect. In this sense ‘development’ is the progress of human welfare and civilization. Hence rural development has to be understood in a broad manner from covering increased production to the creation of a hygienic and sound environment and continued happiness to the people living in rural areas.

 

3.1 Concept of Rural Development

 

Rural development has been defined as a strategy to promote the social life of village people in general and particularly to extend the economic and social benefits to the rural poor. Rural development specialists have defined the term rural development in many ways. According to Ensminger:

 

“Rural development seeks to involve a process of transformation from traditionally oriented rural cultural towards an acceptance and reliance on science and technology.”

 

Lele defines “Rural development as an improvement in the living standard of the masses of low income population residing in rural areas and making the process of self-sustaining.”

 

In fact, rural development involves a process in which the rural society as a whole moves from one step of the economic ladder to the next step ahead, thereby enhancing its social and economic status. However, the gist of all the definitions of rural development filters down to a primary goal of providing an opportunity for decent living to the masses of the low income population residing in rural areas on a self sustaining basis.

 

The concept of rural development was first used in India by the planners. It is the very process of the planning to implement rural development programmes through an appropriate strategy to realize the desired results.4 It connotes a strategy for bringing about improvements in the economic and social life of the rural poor who seek a livelihood in rural areas, Not only, it is important to raise agricultural productivity and the rate of overall economic growth in rural areas; equally important is to ensure that the poor and weaker sections share in the benefits of development. The main theme of rural development may be summarized as follows:

 

(i)                 To achieve enhanced production and productivity in rural areas.

(ii)               To bring about a greater socio-economic equity,

(iii)             To bring about a spatial balance in social and economic development.

(iv)              To bring about improvement in the ecological environment so that it may be conductive to growth and happiness, and

(v)                To develop broad based community participation in the process of development.

 

The concept of rural development has been engaging the attention of international agencies and Asian countries in the last few years. Because of local variations and administrative or financial limitations no omnibus proposition can be advanced though some exercises in outlining the broad objectives have been undertaken, For example the ESCAP , in consolation with member countries and in partnership with international organization and specialized agencies of the United Nations has indicated that the objectives of rural development are:

 

(a)    To draw the entire rural labour force into main stream of economic activity.

(b)    To realize the creative energies of the rural people.

(c)    To bring down into the countryside and check the drift of the rural population to cities.

(d)    To enhance the participation of towns, men and youths in the development process.

(e)    To improve the living conditions of the rural majority and the quality of their life, particularly through the integration of development with environment.

(f)      To ensure the all-round development of the population its economic and social productivity and work satisfaction.

 

 

3.2 A New Approach to Rural Development

 

In recent years, the concept of integrated rural development its very much used in the plan documents and in different studies on rural development. The frame work of rural development based on this concept aims at removal of poverty, inequality and unemployment by area planning in two ways.

 

  • By differentiating rural areas as different units for spatial planning on the basis of their socio-economic activities of developmental importance, and

 

  • By integrating these activities in the operational process of development these activities in the operational process of development in space, so that the pressure of dependence on agriculture are reduced by creating additional sources of income and employment generation for the rural people, particularly those who are poor.

 

3.3 Objectives of Rural Development

 

Rural development needs accelerated attention for any fact of development. Primarily it requires change sin the economic, social, political and psychological behavior of rural people who are illiterate and ignorant. According to Azmat Nayeem “Rural development is both problem and solution.”

 

The fundamental objectives of rural development imply the standard of living of the rural population. The real rural development should have the following main objectives:-

 

(a)   Improvement in the quality of life of the rural poor.

(b)   Improvement of services of rural masses in the process.

(c)    Improvement of know-how which is to be implemented to the rural people to infuse in them a sense of pragmatism in the process of development.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4. Non-governmental organizations as agents of rural development          

 

Based on the vast expanse of literature that has tried to explain what constitutes non-governmental organizations, Kane (1990:14) argues that the concept may vary from “charity in the noble and/or religious sense of the term, to political associations, and local and popular development initiatives” which makes a definition extremely difficult.

 

The problematic nature of NGOs and therefore the difficulty in finding a definition for them is illustrated by Salem and Eaves (1989), who declare that “until 1983, there was no (World) Bank statement which clearly and comprehensively defined NGOs”. Despite their problematic nature, Kane (1990: 14-15) identifies three criteria that could assist in their definition.

 

Kane’s three criteria for the definition of an NGO

 

  1. It should be privately set up (as opposed to being ser up by the state) and structured and sufficiently autonomous in its activity and financing. This, above all, is what ensures its non-governmental character.  
  2. It should be a non-profit-making institution to ensure its “voluntary” or “benevolent” character.
  3. It should support development. This is what ensures its “public interest” character, even if governments have introduced legislation to limit the ar3eas in which “public interest” can be exercised.
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


In accordance with the first criterion identified by Kane, Padron (1987:71) argues that one of the central characteristics of NGOs is the fact that they are “not part of a government and others have not been established as a result of an agreement between governments.”

 

Kane’s second criterion, namely the non-profit dimension of NGOs, is also supported by the Development Bank of Southern Africa, which states that NGOs should be “non-profit seeking, in that any surpluses generated during the courses of activities are utilized to further the development aims and objectives of the organization.” (McLachlan 1991:1). The emphasis on non-profitability is also stressed by Erasmus (1992), who defines NGOs in terms of being non-profitable organizations that seek to “amass financial and/or technical/scientific resources to meet socially identified needs.” (Erasmus 1992:13).

 

4.1 FUNCTIONING OF NGOs

 

Before proceeding to a discussion of the specific aspects regarding the functioning of NGOs, it is necessary to construct a general overview of the backdrop to the dynamics involved in the processes of NGO-related development. Pardon (1987:71) states that the context within which NGOs function is made up of four interrelated dimensions (see Figure 5.1). They are:

 

  • The popular sector and the historical context;
  • Institutional relationships of the NGO;
  • The internal dynamics of the NGO; and
  • The project itself.

 

 

In terms of its functionality, Padron (1987:71-2) argues that NGO exists by establishing a working relationship with the popular sector, which also functions within a historical context. The historical context is of importance as it defines the specific nature of the given social reality within which both the NGO and the popular sector/community function.

 

It is important to note that, in terms of participation, communities are able to express their own conception of what development entails: in terms of participation in their own societies and expression of what development means for them; in their understanding of participation, and the way they define their role in the development process (Padron 1987:72).

 

The NGO is not only engaged in a relationship with the popular sector but also with the institutional sector. In terms of this relationship, NGOs engage in a mutually beneficial relationship with other agents of change which are active in the same area (Padron 1987:72). NGOs are not only influenced by the popular and the institutional sectors, but also by their own internal dynamics, institutional development and characteristics. All the abovementioned dynamics determine the way in which NGO projects are to be implemented (pardon 1987:72). The interrelated nature of this process, as illustrated by Padron (1987), is supported by Salem and Eave’s (1989:3) analysis of the project cycle. According to them, a typical NGO project cycle consists of the following phases:

 

  • Analysis of development issues:
  • Project identification;
  • project design;
  • project financing
  • project implementation; and
  • Monitoring and evaluation.

 

4.2 STRENGTHS OF NGOs

 

Some of the strengths of NGOs include the following:

  • Because they are able to facilitate a relatively high degree of community participation, they can accurately identify the specific needs of a community (Cernea 1988:17). In other words, NGOs can more effectively identify community needs because they are closer to the community than government structures. This is because the members of the NGO may live in the community or even belong to the community which they serve.
  • Because they are functioning at community level, or have been created as a result of a community initiative, they tend to enjoy more legitimacy in the communities which they serve. This is because communities might feel that such initiatives are their own, and effectively address their own needs and interests. The project therefore becomes the property of the community, and because the community sees the project as its owns its members are more likely to support it.
  • The high degree of community participation creates as conducive environment in which local knowledge and technology can be utilized and adapted to local development needs. This high degree of participation allows communities to apply knowledge and technologies which they have developed themselves to suit their own situation.
  • Because of their structure, which is not characterized by the same bureaucratic nature as that of government, they are very flexible and adaptive to local conditions and changes in the environment (Paulton & Harris 1988:184). This means that they can respond faster to situations and that their running costs are lower because of their smaller organizational size, supported by its voluntary character.

 

4.3 WEAKNESSES OF NGOs

 

From what has been discussed thus far it appears that NGOs are very well suited as instruments that facilitate the process of development. In spite of this apparent endowment it is important to note that there are certain limitations that can inhibit the effective functioning of NGOs. Merrington (1992:16) summarizes the limitations of NGOs as follows:

 

  • Inadequate planning, organization and management;
  • Inadequate staff training;
  • Inability to replicate projects and ensure sustainability;
  • Inability to effectively collaborate at appropriate levels with government  services;
  • A lack of co-ordination of the efforts of individual NGOs to ensure an effective macro level spread of development.

 

In addition to this, Clark (1990:57) also states that too little attention is given to leadership and management training. This situation is aggravated by the fact that leadership in NGOs tends to be charismatic, and once such a leader disappears from the scene there is nobody to take his/her place, thus creating a leadership vacuum. The lack of leadership and relevant management skills may also have a negative effect on the capacity of the NGO to perform complex projects or tasks. This inability may, in turn; increase the inability of an NGO to be able to “scale up” successful projects and replicates them on a regional or national scale (Brown & Korten 1989:16). The implication of this is that most NGOs are unable to provide routine services to large populations on a sustainable basis.

 

Another serious problem is their inability to learn from the mistakes that other NGOs make. This is due to the high level of isolation and rivalry that exists among NGOs which hampers the process of social learning (Clark 1990:60). One of the advantages of NGOs is that they are very specific in terms of their actions and the needs of communities that they serve. But because they are so specific in their actions, they sometimes tend to ignore the larger context, in which they operate, and the other agencies and forces that also function in the same system. This makes it almost impossible to implement truly integrated development actions which would benefit from the economy of scale (see also Unit 3).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5. Performance of SHDI for rural development in Haramaya Woreda   

 

As the project is an integrated one it tried to solve the complex rural development problems through its various components. These components include crop production, livestock production, soil and water conservation, public health, education, rural water supply, women’s programme and training. Partners in this project are: local communities, Agriculture department (at woreda and zonal level), Health department (at woreda and zonal level), Education department (at woreda and zonal level), Water mines and Energy development department (at woreda and zonal level), Cooperative promotion, Haramaya University.

 

5.1  Crop Production

 

The objectives of crop production

 

  • Increase total production and productivity per unit area for household consumption and there by increase house hold income
  • Improved seed supply for about 15% of the area under annual crops
  • Improve crop storage systems.
  • Improve farmers access to agricultural inputs.

 

To meet these objectives, distribution of improved seeds, and promotion of vegetable production and construction of improved potato stores were undertaken. In the seed distribution scheme, improved seeds of maize, sorghum and potato were distributed in credit to potential farmers who can properly produce the improved seed and can repay the seed credit.

 

In case of maize and sorghum, a king of informal seed multiplication by farmer’s strategy was followed. Here potential target farmers were identified by the project and agriculture department staff and given seed credit. In this scheme 445 and 300 farmers participated in maize and sorghum seed production respectively and produced 8680 and 3625 quintals of maize and sorghum respectively. Framers produce the improved seed and repay the seed credit in kind at harvest to other target farmers in their vicinity identified by the project. The recovery percent of the seed credit is more than 90% Moreover, the seed producing farmers were encouraged to share the improve seed to other 3-5 farmers in the same village on sale, in kind exchange or as gift. This strategy was found effective and fast method for the diffusion of improved varieties among farmers with low cost However, the system demands close follow-up and continuous supply of the improved seeds. For the sustainability of the system, the department of agriculture is closely working with project and will adopt the system once the revolving seed scheme is installed. Benefits resulting from the production of improved maize and sorghum is expressed by increased crop productivity of maize from 10 quintals per hectare in the local variety to 30-40 quintals per hectare in the improved variety and for that of sorghum form 15 quintals per hectare in the local variety to 15 quintals per hectare in the improved variety for the participating farmers.

 

As response to the request from the communist, 450 and 880 quintal of maize and sorghum seeds respectively were distributed to 4,904 farmers who faced seed shortage due to the drought occurred in 1999 crop season. In case of potatoes improved seed is given as credit. In this system 2,263 quintals of different varieties of potato tuber seed was distributed to 1,233 farmers. The seed credit repayment rate is 100%. The system resulted in a high rate of improved seed diffusion to the farming community. This has resulted in an increase of potato productivity from 125 quintals per hectare to 275 quintals per hectare and potato production areas steadily increased in the area. To ensure the sustainability of improved potato seed tuber distribution, the Alemaya Farmers’ cooperative Union is going to take the responsibility of the project and necessary preparations are being made. Technical advises will be provided by the department of agriculture and cooperatives’ promotion department at woreda level.

 

To reduce potato post harvest crop 14 diffused light stores were constructed on cost sharing basis between the project and the beneficiaries against 7 DLS earlier planned. Presently these stores are effectively used by the farmers to store potato until the planting time. These stores were found to reduce post harvest losses by up to 75% for farmers who have adopted the stores. In response to the community request, 200, 153, and 39 quintals of haricot been, chickpea and groundnut seeds respectively were distributed to farmers who faced crop failure in the years 1999 and 2000 to be used for planting late in the season.

 

In an effort to promote vegetable production, access was created to improved vegetable seeds and irrigation pumps to farmers who have potential to produce vegetables More than 2000 farmers participated in improved vegetable production. In this scheme 803kg of different vegetable seeds were distributed to farmers. The irrigation facility provided to the farmers has resulted in flooding of vegetables in the farming system as compared to the years before the project.

 

In most cases, targets were substantially exceeded in crop production component. This is substantiated by the increase in percentage of number of farmers to 23% as compared to the target set to 15% producing of two or three crops per year, a wide range of food production, diets and nutrition improved through production of wide range of crops, distribution of improved seed through farmer to farmer seed diffusion, efficient marketing of vegetables and input supply by the Union and increased income through the sale of surplus produce.