Achieving Success in Rural Development:

1
Achieving Success in Rural Development Tools
and Approaches for Implementation of an Integral
Approach by Alain de Janvry University of
California at Berkeley
2

• OUTLINE
• Five questions and some recommendations
• I. Why is it necessary to give increased
  attention to rural
• development to meet the MDGs?
• Why have past approaches at integrated rural
  development not been more effective?
• III. Are there new opportunities for success?
• What have we learned from experiences with new
  approaches?
• What are the broad principles of an approach to
  integral rural development?
• Recommendations for ECOSOCs rural development
  agenda.

3

• Why is it necessary to give increased attention
  to
• rural development to meet the MDG?
• Rural areas harbor 75 of world poverty, while
  receiving only 25 of
• major donors expenditures.
• Slow decline in the share of world poverty that
  is rural has been due
• to migration to urban areas more than to
  improvements in rural
• incomes, contributing to relocate poverty in the
  urban sector.
• Rural areas are also suffering from major neglect
  in social investment
• Are lagging in all indicators of social
  development (education, health,
• and status of women) relative to urban areas.
• Hence, reaching all MDGs requires attacking
  directly
• Rural poverty,
• Rural lags in social development,
• i.e., requires success in rural development.

4
75 of world poverty is rural needs direct
attention. Rural poverty declines only modestly
with rising GDPpc need make growth more
efficient for poverty reduction.
5

• Why have past approaches at rural development not
  been more effective?
• Integrated Rural Development approach of the
  1970s-80s
• State-led, centered on agriculture and farms
  (Green Revolution for smallholders), not based on
  voice and choice of actors, not much attention
  paid to heterogeneity.
• General outcomes?
• Results have not been sustainable beyond state
  support.
• Approach has been made dysfunctional by decline
  in the role of the state and public budgets.
• Drift in attacking rural poverty toward welfare
  transfers instead of income generation and social
  development.

6

• Lessons learned from Integrated RD
• Need re-center rural development toward
• Reliance on private and collective initiatives of
  the poor themselves instead of state tutelage.
• Achieve competitiveness of the poor in the
  context of market forces (dynamic markets,
  correct market failures) Help the poor play by
  the rules.
• Rural is more than agriculture Use multisectoral
  approaches, rural-urban linkages in a territorial
  perspective, pluriactivity.
• Need for supportive international and macro
  policies (no agricultural bias).
• Recognition of heterogeneity of circumstances
  Differentiated approaches, demand-led,
  multiplicity of strategies out of poverty.
• Sharp increase in social investments (health,
  education, women status), but need make them more
  efficient to attract aid budgets.

7
III. Are there new opportunities for
success? Five reasons for optimism and their
challenges

• Widespread progress with democracy,
  decentralization, and thickening of local
  organizations allows new people-centered
  approaches.
• Challenge How to use these institutional
  revolutions for economic and political gains by
  the poor?
• 2. Greater freedoms in experimenting with
  approaches that
• can place the poor and their organizations as
  agents of change.
• Challenge How to design experiments with new
  approaches?
• Increased importance given to environmental
  problems.
• Challenge How use for RD?
• Modest increase in foreign aid budgets.
• Challenge How to make a convincing case in
  using for RD?
• Steep learning curve with elements of a new
  integral rural development approach.
• Challenge How to use for design and scaling up?

8

• IV. What have we learned from experience with
  new
• approaches to rural development?
• (esp. IFAD, IAF, WB, DIFID, NGOs)
• Need a conceptual framework that gives logic to
  the different elements
• of an integral approach to rural development.
• Framework must be able to
• Explain the determinants of rural well-being
  (predict outcomes).
• Identify the entry points (policies and programs)
  for rural
• development interventions that can improve
  well-being.
• 3. Identify the processes through which
  pro-poor rural policies
• and programs are determined.
• Identify instruments for greater efficiency in
  program
• implementation.

9
(No Transcript)
10

• Lessons about four entry points for investing
  in RD
• Entry point I Programs to increase access
  to assets
• Access to land Many options (Land Coalition)!
• Constitutional obligations and expropriations
  (MST land reform).
• Reform of inheritance rights (especially for
  women).
• Recuperation of lands with illegal and incomplete
  titles.
• Subsidies to poor for market purchases (Cedula da
  Terra).
• Challenge Key for success is for beneficiaries
  to achieve
• competitiveness once access has been secured.
• Cash transfers for rural education (Progresa,
  Bolsa Escola)
• Effective but expensive need be more efficient.
• Challenge Target on poverty? Or for maximum
  educational gains?
• If target on children at risk instead of children
  on poverty, can
• achieve large efficiency gains as many poor send
  their children to
• school without subsidies, and some less-poor do
  not.

11

• Entry Point II Programs to improve context
• OECD policies and the profitability crisis of
  agriculture
• undermine rural development
• Doha in the perspective of the MDGs.
• Transition strategies for peasantries toward a
  new agricultural
• order.
• 2. Achieve macro-sector-rural policy consistency
  
• The rural lens approach (Canada) rural
  impact assessment.
• 3. Pursue a territorial approach (regional
  development)
• Rural households have diversified sources of
  income
• need a multisectoral approach as opposed to
  sectoral.
• Decentralization at the municipal level is
  effective for public
• goods and social expenditures.
• Need larger regions for economic projects define
  regions (rural-urban
• linkages) and set institutions (coordination,
  planning, and promotion).

12

• Rural development programs for economic
  incorporation
• Help the poor access local investment and
  employment opportunities
• created by regional development information,
  organizations.
• Raise the productivity of the poors assets
  technology (CGIAR),
• organizations for the creation of value (and not
  rents).
• Demand-led approaches (CDD) need assist
  community capacity
• (competitive funds for technical assistance,
  democratic
• governance). Cannot assume that already exists!
  (Africa)
• Promote poor-non-poor linkages (joint ventures,
  sub-contracts) and
• organize the poor for bargaining with non-poor
  (coops NTX
• Guatemala, Petrolina Brazil).
• Functionalize migration for rural development
• Assist rural areas release prepared individuals
  for urban employment.
• Help migrants find employment in their regions of
  origin.
• Channel remittances toward local investment
  (e.g., local banks Mexico).
• Make migrants agents of local change (clubs,
  ideas, subcontracts).

13

• Entry Point III
• Programs of transfers for social protection
• Insurance (ex-ante safety nets) for welfare and
  efficiency
• (risk-taking) Guaranteed employment (India),
  right-to-food.
• Social security for rural areas welfare, earlier
  access to land for
• youth (Brazil).
• Transfers for victims of endemies (e.g., orphans
  of AIDS pandemic)

14
Entry Point IVPrograms to promote the social
incorporation of the poor

• Key pillar of an integral approach to rural
  development
• Empowerment, representation, voice to create
  opportunities.
• Role of poor or pro-poor organizations local and
  peak (Senegal).
• Programs to improve the capacity of local
  organizations (Burkina Faso).
• Effective participation of poor as social actors
  (Cajamarca) requires
• Information.
• Platforms for dialogue.
• Political institutions for representation.

15

• What are the broad principles of an approach to
• integral rural development?
• Five recommendations for ECOSOCs RD agenda
• Approach not based on blueprints, but on local
  initiatives and learning-by-doing. Five
  recommendations to promote integral RD
• Create capabilities make rural poor into able
  agents of change.
• Instruments Social development, access to
  assets, social protection.
• Create citizenship assist social incorporation
  of the rural poor.
• Instruments Organizations (voice),
  decentralization, devolution.
• Create opportunities for poor to generate income
  in regions.
• Instruments Territorial approach, new
  agriculture, profitability of commodities (Doha
  and transition), functionalize migration,
  demand-led programs for public goods (choice),
  payments for environmental services, new rural
  institutions, poor-non-poor linkages.

16

• Create political support for rural development
  elevate RD in the political agenda.
• Instruments Rural lens, political reforms for
  participation of rural people.
• 5. Improve learning with integral rural
  development.
• Instruments Analyze current experiences,
  experiment with alternatives, do in-progress
  impact analysis, and participatory learning.
  Need be funded largely as public goods.
• End