Key lessons learned on the CDD experience Towards a renewed CDD approach

About CDD we learned CDD is a way to unleash the potential for change of the rural communities Communities have institutions that can be used (and improved) to achieve IFAD corporate objectives CDD means empowering the communities to shape their own institutional and socio-economic development CDD addresses contextually the institutional system within and around the communities, that is, the key issues of local governance to achieve: more equity, stability, and growth in rural societies, and a more efficient use of public resources committed to that end

Empowering the communities to shape their own development Promoting sustainable CBOs and sustainable linkages with the World outside the community Two options to reach the communities: Through the public administration Through civil society organizations

What is a sustainable organization? Being part of a formal government structure does not mean that an organization is sustainable It may be there (for ever) only on paper, with formal powers that are neither defined not financially supported An organization is sustainable if it “stands on its own feet”, i.e. if: its authority rests on the consensus of its members that it fulfills the functions that prompted its creation, not on external patronage, and it is capable to raise, from within and from outside the membership, the resources needed to exercise its functions

Issues with the first option: Need to find the right level to reach the communities: The district is far too remote Without corrective measures, district administrations tend to replicate at their level the centralized approach that prompted administration reform in the first place Sub-district units of the public administration are more effective activators of delivery mechanisms But still view the communities Only as users of services not as subjects of change in their own right Need to balance the hierarchical relations with the higher levels of the local government

Issues with the second option: Changing the nature of the relations with the communities is possible Partnerships that join together the CBOs, the civil society, and the private sector, besides the government: Provide access to a wider horizon and more sources of support than just the government Provide opportunities to adopt community-friendly procedures Force the CBOs to devise the instruments of their own sustainability and growth Establish centers of pluralistic governance and promote autonomous advocacy of community interests

The two options: Are not mutually exclusive, and in the course of time may well complement one another However, the second option helps: to establish centers of pluralistic governance, effective participation, and the unidirectional allegiance of the community leaders to their membership Policy dialogue is essential to: reach understanding and agreement with government before projects start keep projects on the right track during implementation a right venue for policy dialogue is important

Police dialogue Policy dialogue is essential to: reach understanding and agreement with government on the project CDD approach before projects start keep projects on the right track during implementation The right venue for policy dialogue is important

Promoting viable institutions within the communities: Better understanding of the current institutional system Identifying factors of endogenous change Identifying factors that govern reactions to external stimuli Identifying factors that determine community demand Monitoring the reactions to project conditions of “inclusiveness”

Improving equity within the community: Understanding the mechanisms that exist in the traditional institutions and using them to better help the poor Selecting self-targeting instruments to complement a reasonably equitable pattern of demand spontaneously emerging from the communities Advocating specific project conditions to secure “inclusiveness” in the CBOs and in their decision making bodies, Encouraging women and poor HHs participation through functional literacy training

Promoting enabling institutions around the communities: Understanding the institutional systems Identifying enabling and disabling agencies and actors Establishing dialogue with both Addressing the very key issue of inappropriate processes and procedures

Appropriate procedures to respond to community demand … Simplify greatly the community capability building programme Free resources to train more CBOs, and to train more intensively (on more but less complex subject matters) Improve the chances of building sustainable project exit arrangements for the CBOs

Improving delivery mechanisms to foster the local economy CDD respects the emerging pattern of spontaneous community demand Need to work more on the factors that affect the demand for production oriented services and infrastructure, such as: Pertinence and effectiveness of research and development activities Absence or slow contextual establishment of mechanism that support private investment, such as MFIs and specialized instruments of support for micro-enterprises

More direct impact of project funded investment expenditure on the local economy There seems to be considerable scope to build a market for community level suppliers, for example: by designing facilities in such a way as to enable local micro enterprise to bid for the jobs by training of local micro-enterprises leading to pre- qualification for bidding for project funded jobs, and by including a preference for local micro-suppliers by designing mechanisms and resources that enable managers of project funds to handle very small contractors

By increasing community social capital CDD reduces transaction costs Of technology transfer: CBOs spread information among members at zero cost to the extension service Of credit: MFIs transaction costs are paid for by the members Of infrastructure construction and maintenance: through the partners’ share of investment and their commitment to operate without external financial assistance Of input supply and product marketing: professional associations of CBOs pool procurement of information, goods and services, and arrange common sale of products

Improving impact may need improving the process to design CDD projects Need to start with better defining the expected impact at the level of the CBOs From there, better define the target project exit arrangements (in terms of sustainable CBOs and enabling institutions) Analyze the institutional system to identify enabling and disabling factors, agencies and agents Then construct the activities that lead to the exit arrangements Contextually produce Implementation Manuals in a participatory way

Finally, adjust the M&E system to capture the impact of the CDD approach More focus may be considered on indicators such as: The quality of the partnership established, assessed by: the relationships between the CBOs and the different levels of the public administration, the civil society, the private sector the transparency and accountability processes envisaged the inclusiveness and representation in the CBOs decision making bodies The sustainability and growth potential achieved by the CBOs

… more possible indicators of CDD The quality and role of the emerging CBO leaders (within their communities and beyond the community: political arena, civil society organizations, etc.) The influence of the CBOs in decision making about provision of public services (effectiveness of advocacy to improve on government failures) The success of the CBOs and of unions of CBOs on reducing the impact of market failures