APPENDIX 6
Memorandum submitted by Intermediate Technology
Development Group Ltd
We welcome the publication of a second White
Paper on international development. There is much to welcome in
the paper—notably the serious attempt at coherence in government
policy towards international development; the untying of aid;
clear recognition of the situation and desires of poor women and
men; the commitment to aid policy change in the EU; reform of
the CAP; and international institutional reform—but we would
like to concentrate here on issues on which we believe ITDG has
experience and a particular competence. We would be grateful if
you would bring these to the notice of the members of the Select
Committee.
TECHNOLOGY
ITDG is very pleased to note the recognition
in the White Paper of the importance of technology change for
poverty reduction. The paper not only acknowledges that globalisation
has been facilitated by the development of new technologies (17),
but that technology change, through the diffusion of new ideas
and knowledge, is essential for the elimination of poverty (105,
127). The paper also recognises that essential capabilities—health
and education—are required for the advantages of new technologies
to be achieved (45).
It has been our experience that the appropriateness
of new technology to the circumstances of women and men living
in poverty is rarely explicitly considered by international development
organisations and NGOs. The White Paper, we note, when discussing
access to, and diffusion of, technology, focuses on "countries"
and not on people. It is poor women and men, who need access to
improved technologies that are relevant to their particular circumstances,
including their gender, their skills, and their physical location.
Most of the world's technology research and development is designed
to meet the needs of the industrialised world, and there is little
evidence to suggest that global markets will deliver improved
technologies that the poor will find affordable, appropriate and
accessible.
SMES
We welcome the recognition in the White Paper
of the great significance of micro- and small-scale enterprises
(MSEs) "as the main source of employment in developing countries"
(94, 154). The need to identify and support enabling environments
for the poor in small enterprises is highlighted, but the list
of government actions at the end of the chapter makes no mention
of it (90-94). Given recognition of their importance as a source
of employment, and the obvious importance of secure employment
for poverty reduction, we would expect to see the small enterprise
sector being clearly assigned a more prominent place in the work
of DFID.
The constraints to market access mentioned are
well known, as is the importance of addressing more than credit
needs. Yet, the evidence that any more than a small minority of
MSEs can and will gain from market liberalisation is absent. The
vast majority of MSE operators have few assets, have very narrow
margins and serve low-income domestic markets. It is difficult
to see how any policy prescriptions proposed in the White Paper
will enable them to engage in globalised markets. Practical and
policy measures are needed that will enable MSEs to adapt production
methods, design competitive products and access information about
markets and technology options. These might include forms of the
public-private partnership which the White Paper proposes as ways
forward in other areas.
ENVIRONMENT AND
RENEWABLE ENERGY
We welcome the Government's recognition that
patterns of consumption in industrialised countries, including
the UK, will have to change (261) and we look forward to further
policy initiatives by Government to bring this about. Meanwhile
the support for initiatives to reduce emissions to the atmosphere
is welcome.
The White Paper suggests that these global initiatives
are in part to address the situation of the two billion people
lacking access to commercial energy services. As international
financing for renewable energy in developing countries comes on
stream, through the G8 initiative and the Clean Development Mechanism,
there is a need to build upon good practice and knowledge in supporting
poor people to access energy services. ITDG has contributed to
the G8 initiative, and we welcome their recognition that renewables
often provide the most cost-effective energy solution for poor
people's domestic energy use. But we should not look to the poor
to take on the burden of climate change reductions.
ICTS
There is little argument that modern information
and communications technologies (ICTs) have facilitated the process
of globalisation, and that they are having an impact in developing
countries. While appropriate regulation and policy frameworks
are indeed essential (119), the challenge of how ICTs can be made
accessible—physically and affordably—to poor people
remains. The White Paper advocates "public-private partnerships",
but if these are purely commercially oriented then the poor will
lose out. R&D on content, applications, software and even
hardware is not commercially driven with the needs of the poor
in mind, and there is a role for development assistance to support
the development of poverty-focused applications.
It is all too easy to see ICTs as revolutionising
the opportunities for poor people, overlooking the many years
of experience in the development community of communications and
of technology change, because the technologies are new and rapidly
changing. The so-called 'digital divide' is, however, only another
dimension of inequality—the information "poor"
are "the poor". ITDG shares the Government's belief
that modern ICTs have the potential to contribute to poverty elimination,
but this should not overshadow the continuing role of traditional,
oral and written, information and communications technologies.
SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE
While there is no question that there is a far-reaching
need for direct and substantial investment in research that benefits
poor people (136), the White Paper is mistaken when it states
that small scale agricultural enterprises have no capacity to
undertake this research (137). The implication that technology
change comes from outside fails to recognize the creativity of
millions of women and men farmers continuously engaged in innovative
processes by which they may find new ways of producing crops and
securing livelihoods. Raising the profile of the mass of farmer-managed
micro-experiments, the perceptions and experience of poor small
producers, should be at the forefront of the research process,
thereby improving their capacities to adopt and adapt new skills
and technologies.
The White Paper suggests that there is a "need
to modernise agriculture" in developing countries in order
to enable them to export the kind of agricultural produce demanded
in the industrialised countries (223). Technologies and social
processes for a local level sustainable agriculture are well-tested
and established, contributing to higher farm productivity, better
nutrition, improved natural capital, stronger social organisations,
knowledge and self-esteem. Few poor farmers are able to take on
the risks of shifting production to meet export demands, a change
that often leads to greater vulnerability.
Research by ITDG and ActionAid has shown that
communities seek guidance and support to develop appropriate strategies
to deal with challenges in agricultural production and natural
resource management. Of particular importance for setting policies
that support this are, the confusion of traditional and formal
management approaches; how gender can affect institutional, environmental
and policy-related changes; and who owns and controls resources.
In our experience, farmers and local communities
are able to organise and manage their resources as common properties—and
have often done so over long periods of time. Common property
rights can achieve much greater efficiencies in resource use,
innovation, and greater equity in civil society. While the White
Paper highlights the importance of secure property rights, we
need to recognise the inherent tension between increasing production
and the need to sustain the local and global commons, which is
at the heart of the debate on ways forward in agricultural production
and poverty reduction.
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
RIGHTS
We welcome the recognition in the White Paper
of the pressing need to protect traditional knowledge and access
to genetic resources (147). To this end the Government's invitation
to further dialogue on a pro-poor review of TRIPs, and the formation
of an Intellectual Property Rights Commission are constructive
measures. They are clearly related, and we would expect the Commission's
work to be completed before the Government's stance in TRIPs negotiations
is fixed. ITDG, which has experience of contributing both to debate
on TRIPs issues and to international commissions, looks forward
to the opportunity to contribute to these processes.
NGOS
ITDG endorses the White Paper's view that there
is a role for UK-based NGOs to develop civil society in the South
(311). Like many other NGOs, we are already doing this. We also
support the view that NGOs should undertake larger programmes
of work (314). However, small projects should not be overlooked
as they provide excellent opportunities for innovation and action
research, and are more likely to reflect needs and priorities
of the people affected.
We note the commitment to continue the Development
Policy Forums (363), which are "intended as an opportunity
to listen to a wide variety of views, to discuss government policy
and to build support for development." (Box 16) ITDG welcomes
DFID's support for public education and opportunities to contribute
to this work. Means, in particular, to enable the uninformed to
understand better the local and global significance of international
development are required.
Overall, the White Paper places considerable
emphasis on the need for the "right policies" if globalisation
is to contribute to the elimination of poverty and reduction of
inequality. There is sufficient evidence, recognised by the White
Paper, that the immediate effects of market liberalisation and
structural adjustment, key elements of the "right policies",
can be extremely damaging to the livelihoods of poor women and
men. There is little evidence that countries are able to get through
this stage before the negative effects on people result in consequences
for the longer term. The White Paper suggests that in the longer
term the poor will benefit, but often this appears to be through
indirect multiplier (trickle down) effects.
Nevertheless, the Government's position that
the process of globalisation needs to be managed and regulated
with poverty elimination in mind, is welcome. And we hope to be
able to work with DFID and other government departments to achieve
this.
Andrew Scott, Policy Director.
Intermediate Technology Development Group Ltd
January 2001
| 
