Memorandum submitted by the Department
for International Development (DFID)
A. INDIA IN
THE WORLD
India is home to a sixth of the world's population,
and has made good development progress over the last two decades.
India's economic growth rate of 5.5% since 1980 puts it among
the top 10 performing economies in the world. Other achievements
include a robust democracy, a satisfactory balance of payments,
significant increases in life expectancy and literacy, self-sufficiency
in food, abundant foreign exchange reserves, and a high growth
rate for the export of services, especially information technology.
India plays an important role in regional and
global issues, including migration, peacekeeping and trade. It
is influential in the UN and G77 and is a key player in the WTO.
India worked with coalitions of developing countries to influence
the outcome of the WTO "Development Round" Summit in
Cancún in 2003. At least 2% of Indians live outside India
and are a growing cultural influence worldwide, as well as a source
of investment and remittances for India.
The UK is committed to a mature and modern bilateral
relationship with India, a relationship that recognises India's
standing as a key international player and an increasingly open
society with a vibrant democracy. Emerging areas of cooperation
include pro-poor economic growth, trade and international markets,
climate change and other global environmental and energy issues.
As India establishes itself as a provider of
development assistance, DFID India will seek to exchange information
on development practice, and to benefit from India's extensive
knowledge of other developing countries through its diplomatic
and business networks. DFID India looks forward to continuing
to strengthen our working partnership with the Government of India
(GoI) to meet the internationally agreed MDG targets for India
by 2015.
B. THE CASE
FOR AID
TO INDIA
1. The rationale for, and added value of,
aid to India, taking account of its needs and those of other recipients
of development assistance
The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) will
be won or lost in India. India is home to over a quarter of the
world's extreme poor, and progress towards poverty reduction in
India is essential if the MDGs are to be met globally. The case
for aid to India is strong.
DFID aid allocations are informed by a combination
of factors, including population, income poverty, and the policy
environment/performance. Research (eg Collier and Dollar) suggests
that aid is most effectively utilised where there are large numbers
of poor people, the policy environment is sound and there is scope
to influence policy direction.
India stands up well to these criteria: it has
around 350 million people living in extreme poverty; the Government
of India is committed to poverty reduction; and the policy and
institutional environment is relatively good. DFID supports country-owned
poverty reduction strategies and country-led development. The
10th Plan is the Government of India's policy and strategy document
for poverty reduction and growth, and forms the basis for development
cooperation between GoI and DFID.
India's relatively high economic growth and
foreign exchange reserves are sometimes used as arguments against
external funding. But the benefits of economic growth have been
uneven, with growing disparities and persistent chronic poverty,
and the sheer scale of the poverty challenge in India is still
immense.
At less than 0.35% of India's GDP, external
assistance is relatively small compared to the resources at the
disposal of the Indian Government. DFID adds value at the national
level by working with other bilateral donors and multilateral
agencies to fill knowledge and financial gaps to help accelerate
progress towards the MDGs. At the state level, development assistance
represents a more substantial percentage of discretionary funds,
and DFID is well positioned to work bilaterally with GoI on managing
public expenditure for poverty reduction and development. DFID
is well placed to respond to Indian decision-makers' requests
for support and to strengthen the poverty reduction impact of
their choices.
2. The appropriate level of overall resource
transfer, size of DFIDI programme and its distribution between
states and the central government
In the New Delhi Declaration of January 2002,
Prime Minister Tony Blair stated the UK's intention to increase
development assistance to India to £300 million a year. Even
discounting for India's large population, aid allocation models
suggest that India could spend increased aid efficiently and effectively.
DFID's 1999 Country Strategy Paper (CSP) was
based on state strategies. We selected four focus states, based
around the aid allocation criteria summarised above. As a result
we have spent over 60% of our resources on state programmes in
the last three years. An important lesson which informed the preparation
of our new Country Assistance Plan was that while state partnerships
are important and need deepening, our national programme also
needs strengthening to increase our impact in the majority of
states where we have no direct partnership or presence. In addition,
a strengthened National Programme will provide opportunities to
influence policies set by the central government.
In 2003-04 we developed major new national programme
spending plans in recognition of the fact that faster progress
is needed on a number of off-track MDGs, including universal primary
education and gender equality in education; maternal, infant and
child mortality; HIV/AIDS; and access to basic sanitation. Plans
scheduled for approval and implementation in 2004-05 include:
£250 million for reproductive and child health; £190
million for universal primary education; and £123 million
for HIV/AIDS.
DFID India is refining its methodology for determining
the allocation of resources between the National Programme and
the four state programmes. This will be based on factors including
poverty levels in different states, absorptive capacity, and opportunities
to maximise the cost-effectiveness of our expenditure on poverty
reduction. Actual expenditure will depend not only on the initial
allocation methodology, but also on National and the State Governments'
response to it and progress achieved against planned commitments.
C. PARTNERSHIPS/SOCIAL
INCLUSION/SECTOR
FOCUS
3. DFIDI role in developing strategic collaboration
and coordination with other donors and the Indian Government,
including sectoral allocations
DFIDI recognises that at the national and state
levels, our effectiveness depends to a large extent on the strength
of our partnerships with others. These partnerships are wide ranging
and include government, key multilateral and bilateral development
agencies, civil society and academic institutions. We are seeking
to be more strategic in our partnerships, recognising the importance
of shared objectives, harmonised practice and our respective comparative
advantages.
We work closely with the Asian Development Bank
(AsDB) and World Bank to enhance the impact of their larger programmes
(eg GoAP-World Bank-DFID assisted Andhra Pradesh Economic and
Public Sector Reform Programme). Our support is used to strengthen
poverty analysis and stakeholder involvement in these programmes,
which provide three quarters of India's external financing. We
also collaborate with a number of UN agencies, recognising the
strength of their relationship with GoI (eg UNICEF-GoI Child Environment,
Sanitation, Hygiene and Water Supply Programme). We maintain regular
dialogue with Japan, the largest donor in India with a very substantial
programme of loans primarily directed towards economic growth
and infrastructure development.
DFIDI's financial resources, while comparatively
small in relation to those of the GoI, can make a significant
contribution to bilateral and multilateral-funded sectoral programmes.
Two clear examples of the strength of such partnerships are the
Reproductive and Child Health Programme and Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan—two
large centrally sponsored health and education programmes in which
DFID is currently engaged. A further example of sectoral collaboration
is in power sector reform, such as the Orissa Power Sector Aid
programme, on which we have been working with the World Bank for
almost a decade.
The Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) is
DFIDI's key central government interlocutor, and is responsible
for co-ordinating the development partnership. The DEA has broadly
welcomed DFIDI's new Country Assistance Plan. However, the Indian
Government's announcement in mid-2003 that it would only agree
new bilateral government-to-government aid projects with the EC,
Germany, Japan, Russia, the UK and the USA has significantly changed
the development co-operation environment. There is also some uncertainty
surrounding DEA positions on a range of issues including direct
budgetary support and donor support to civil society organisations.
We have agreed to hold a Review of our programme with the DEA
in early June 2004, at which we will seek clarification on these
and other operational issues.
4. The extent to which DFIDI is focusing
its activities on the most vulnerable and marginalized groups,
including through engagement with civil society
Equity is a cross-cutting theme for DFID's India
programme: in the 2004-08 CAP we committed ourselves to ensuring
that all of our programmes reach the poorest and most excluded
groups, including women and scheduled tribes and castes.
DFID's understanding of gender and caste issues
and their impact on poverty reduction and development has increased
significantly over recent years. Social inclusion and gender issues
are now mainstreamed into all our projects and programme designs
and implementation, and progress will be monitored against our
CAP commitments. Our Social Inclusion and Gender Equity approach
papers set out how these issues will be addressed across the programme.
Examples of work to reach the most vulnerable
include: support for the development of specific strategies to
reach the poorest regions and marginalised groups, as part of
pooled funding for the central government's national health and
elementary education programmes, the Reproductive and Child Health
Programme and Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan; provision of direct benefits
to tribal communities—the poorest in India—through
the Rural Livelihoods Programmes in Orissa and Madhya Pradesh;
and helping women informal labourers overcome their economic vulnerability
through support to ILO-SEWA, an initiative that supports negotiations
that bring the women higher returns from the market.
Wide-ranging engagement with civil society to
promote pro-poor change is a vital part of DFIDI's strategy to
reach the most marginalised and vulnerable groups. This includes
developing civil society capacity to facilitate poor people's
participation in policy-making and implementation, and to hold
service providers to account. Initiatives include the Poorest
Areas Civil Society Programme, which helps the marginalised demand
the services that matter to them, and to claim their entitlements.
In Orissa, the Civil Society Poverty Programme supports NGOs to
empower representatives from marginalised communities in local
bodies.
5. The threat to achieving the objectives
of DFIDI's Country Assistance Plan because of gender and other
social discrimination
DFIDI recognises that we will be unable to achieve
the objectives set out in our Country Assistance Plan if we fail
to take issues of gender inequality and other forms of discrimination
into account. Accordingly, our India programme is based on analysis
of the political, economic and social forces that have a beneficial
impact on poor people, including of gender differences within
the household. We are developing our understanding of how patronage
and political economy can affect poverty reduction in order to
support efforts to tackle inequality and empower the poorest.
The 2004-08 CAP indicates DFID's intention to broaden our engagement
with civil society, in particular working to strengthening the
links between marginalised groups and decision-makers.
Consideration of incentives and influence are
central to development choices in India, as in other developing
countries, which aim to tackle obstacles to increasing the effectiveness
of service delivery to the poor. At a local level, communal, caste
and other types of violence have a significant effect on people's
lives. They may also constrain the ability of local communities
to take advantage of development opportunities and economic growth.
D. MDGS AND
PSAS
6. Role of the MDGs in shaping DFID's programme
of assistance to India
DFID's India programme both supports the Indian
Government's development priorities as set out in the GoI's 10th
Plan whilst reflecting the importance of progress in India for
global achievement of the MDGs. The two are mutually supportive:
in places the 10th Plan development targets are more ambitious
than the MDGs.
While India is on track to achieve the headline
MDG on halving income-poverty by 2015, progress towards several
other MDGs in India are off-track, including those for maternal
and infant mortality and TB detection. We are adjusting our programmes
at both the state and national level to assist India in stepping
up progress to meet these off-track MDGs.
7. Importance given to gender equality, SRH
and combating HIV/AIDS
As noted in Para 5, DFID recognises that gender
inequality and other forms of discrimination must be taken into
account in order for our CAP objectives to be met. Improving gender
equality is therefore an important cross-cutting theme in all
DFIDI programmes. Given the stark differentials in literacy levels,
wages, and the falling birth ratio of girls to boys, improving
the socio-economic condition of women is essential to achieving
the MDGs in India. Across our programmes of support in areas such
as universal primary education (Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan), rural
livelihoods, health sector and micro-enterprise, we aim to focus
consistently on improving women's access to public services. By
supporting the decentralisation process, we are capitalising on
the opportunity provided by the huge presence of women in local
bodies (eg Andhra Pradesh Urban Services Programme and the proposed
Strengthening Rural Decentralisation Programme in West Bengal).
We have agreed in principle to contribute to
pooled funding for the national family welfare programme "Reproductive
and Child Health II" (RCHII) that will address the challenged
maternal and infant mortality MDGs. Our current efforts at the
design stage of this programme are focussed on ensuring that the
needs of those with the poorest health outcomes are met.
DFID supports the prevention of HIV/AIDS through
the National AIDS Control Programme (NACP). This work includes
mapping vulnerable groups, improving access to key services and
commodities, and raising awareness and reducing stigma. The bulk
of our financial assistance is channelled through the National
AIDS Control Organisation (NACO) to support targeted interventions
to address the needs of vulnerable groups, such as sex workers,
in five states (Gujarat, Orissa, Kerala, West Bengal and Andhra
Pradesh).
DFIDI is funding UNAIDS under NACPII to strengthen
NACO capacity to monitor trends, develop National strategies and
activities, promote broad based political and social mobilization
and advocate for greater political commitment including adequate
resources. We have also funded an innovative HIV awareness raising
drama series, which is screened on nationwide television and has
won awards as a mainstream programme.
8. Obstacles to achieving the MDGs in India
Widening inequalities and weak governance threaten
India's efforts to achieve both its 10th Plan targets and the
MDGs. Indeed, inequality is arguably the most significant obstacle
to eliminating poverty as evidenced in the widening differences
between states (54% of the poor live in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar,
Orissa and Madhya Pradesh); the large gap between rural and urban
areas; and the slow pace of change in long-standing social inequalities.
While scheduled castes and tribes comprise around 25% of the population
they make up 40% of India's poor. Minority (Muslim) communities
also have significantly worse social indicators than the population
at large. The economic and social well-being of women remains
lower than that of men, reflected in differentials in literacy
levels, wages, and the falling ratio of girls to boys.
Weak governance is a further obstacle to achievement
of the MDGs. The Government of India's 10th Plan emphasises that
"weak governance, manifesting itself in poor service delivery,
excessive regulation and uncoordinated and wasteful public expenditure,
is seen as one of the key factors impinging on growth and development".
India's high fiscal deficit also poses a risk
to meeting the MDGs. At 10%, India's combined central and state
fiscal deficit is amongst the highest in the world.
9. Progress against relevant DFID PSA targets
and the MDGs in India
DFID's PSA targets are a subset of the MDGs.
While India is on track to meeting some of the MDGs, renewed efforts
are required against others.
India is making great strides in reducing income
poverty—over the last 10 years. Income poverty has fallen
by 8-10% against both national and international definitions—and
on current trends will meet the income poverty MDG target.
In addition, there is a real possibility for
India of meeting the target of universal enrolment of primary
school age children in schools. Although India treats basic education
as a constitutional right, meeting the target will nonetheless
require considerable effort. Girls' education is a special priority:
currently only two-thirds of girls are enrolled in school.
Other MDG targets (child malnutrition, maternal
mortality and sanitation) are highly unlikely to be met at all-India
level, let alone across all the social and geographical diversities
of the country, and many of the rest (literacy equality, under
five and infant mortality) will only be met with continued effort.
However, the real challenge lies in going beyond
the over-arching MDG and 10th Plan targets to try to address the
immense differentials between states and districts, the rural
and urban poor, and different social groups. The income poverty
MDG will be met nationally in India, but without targeted intervention
the chronically poor are unlikely to be touched by the 8% economic
growth forecast for the 10th Plan period. Uttar Pradesh and Bihar
alone still contain 87,031,832 poor people.
DFIDI is adjusting its programme to respond
to the need to accelerate progress towards specific off-track
MDGs, including maternal mortality, HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis.
At the same time, we need to ensure that other challenges in India
continue to be tackled, including water quality and distribution,
school attendance and quality of education (in addition to enrolment),
hunger and malnutrition, and aspects of gender equality.
The table below sets out progress against the
MDGs and the relevant DFID PSA targets:
INDIA'S LIKELY PROGRESS TOWARDS MEETING THE
MDGS AND RELEVANT DFID PSA TARGETS (AS AT JANUARY 2004)
| MDG target | Present status
| Comments |
Income Poverty to be halved
Likely
| Fell from 36% to 26-29% using the national poverty line and from 46% to 35% using international line.
| Likely to be met at All-India level, but Orissa a challenge. MP and AP could meet the target.
|
% of under-weight children to be halved
Unlikely
| Fell from 64% to 47% from 92/93 to 98/99. |
Child malnutrition declining slowly overall, though increasing in Orissa. Target very unlikely to be met.
|
Universal* Primary Education
Possible with effort. Poor data
| Net attendance age six to 14 approximately 79%, (83% boys, 74% girls).
About 68% complete primary school (70% boys, 65% girls).
| 100% net primary enrolment and completion could be met, but a long way to go.
|
Literacy and Gender Equality
Could be partially met
| Overall literacy 65%—women 52% and men 74%.
Women in non-agric sector rose from 13% (1990) to 17% (2001).
| Equality of primary enrolment may be possible. It may also be possible to equalise youth literacy. India is far from balancing women's representation in government, or in the non-agricultural sector.
|
Reduced Child Mortality *
Possible with effort, but very difficult
| 1998 levels of Under five mortality give 101 per 1,000 for All India, but with wide variations—112 rural, 65 urban; 138 for Madhya Pradesh, 68 for West Bengal—though the trend is largely downwards. Infant mortality fell from 78 per 1,000 to 68 per 1,000 during the 90s.
| Infant and child mortality declining overall, but not fast enough. Orissa high but declining well; MP increasing rather than decreasing. Target could be met with a lot more attention. AP and WB may now be on track to meet the IMR target.
|
Improved Maternal Health
Unlikely to be met
| The 1990 level is unknown with any accuracy, but during the 90s the level was between four and 5.5 per 1,000. Trends are also unknown.
| The present high level makes it extremely unlikely that the MMR will decline sufficiently to meet the target.
|
HIV/AIDS, TB*
and Malaria reversals of trends
Mixed data quality make monitoring very difficult
| 3.8-4.2 million people live with HIV Aids. TB data is based on DOTS1 coverage which is incomplete in India. In those areas where DOTS operates, detection is about 56% and cure 85%. Overall rate is 25%.
Malaria rates highly variable.
| HIV prevalence is low but increasing a little. GoI claim the epidemic is plateauing. TB definitely seems to be on the increase, and malaria may be, but this is not certain. Higher rural than urban figures, and significant inter-State differences.
|
Environmental sustainability
Water—yes
Sanitation—no
| 100% access to safe water met for urban areas, and close to being met in rural areas. Making supplies sustainable is a challenge. Access to sanitation rose from 19% in 1991 to 28% in 2001. The MDG target is 59%.
| Targets for sanitation almost impossible to meet, but for safe water well on track.
|
| | |
Asterisks* denote items included in the DFID PSA
1 DOTS—Directly Observed Treatment Short Courses
E. AID INSTRUMENTS/NATURE
OF ENGAGEMENT/GOVERNANCE
AND POLITICAL
WILL
10. The strengths and limitations of the different aid
instruments used: poverty reduction budget support, projects,
technical assistance and support via civil society.
| Aid Instruments |
Strengths | Limitations
|
| 1. | Project Aid | — Pilot Innovations
— Tangible and specific interventions
— Impact directly assessed
| — Require intensive supervision and monitoring
— Transfer modest level of resource
— Good practice may not be replicated
|
| 2. | Sector-wide approaches (SWAPs):
Support to a specific sector within the context of government policy reform process
| — Enables wider policy dialogue for transformational impact on the whole sector (currently sub sector SWAPS: RCH, SSA being attempted in India)
— Enhanced impact due to donor partnership
— Increased scope for sustainability
| — Only possible if acceptable to recipient government
— Appropriate where development assistance constitutes a significant share of sector expenditure
— Requires government commitment, a good sector strategy and a sound macro and budget environment
|
| 3. | Poverty Reduction Budget Support
Series of reforms are negotiated with government, and funds released in tranches as the reforms are carried out (not linked to a specific project)
| — Supports strategic policy reforms and changes at the state level
— Consistent with partnership as government decides anti poverty strategy and spending pattern
— Enables larger resource transfers
— Enhanced impact due to donor partnerships & harmonized approaches
| — Requires rigorous analysis at State level of fiduciary risks, political economy issues and identification of strategic policy reforms
— Large resource transfers vulnerable as dependent on State governments performance against agreed milestones
— Fungibility issues as GOI may offset budget support to states through compensating adjustments in other central transfers.
|
| 4. | Technical Assistance
| — Useful for diagnostic work
— Develops capacity and aids policy discussions
| — Can fail to support capacity of local institutions
|
| 5. | Support via Civil Society
| — Broadbases dialogue with development partners, beyond government
— Helps improve accountability of development programmes
— Improves demand and access of services to the poor and hard to reach groups
| — Dependent on GOI policies regarding external assistance to CSOs
— Limited capacity of CSOs to engage with government on policy issues
— Weak self regulatory mechanisms amongst Indian CSOs.
|
11. The appropriate balance between aid instruments
DFID India does not consider any particular instrument as
being intrinsically superior to others. Rather, we seek to match
instruments to our objectives and ensure complementarity between
different instruments operating in a particular context. The appropriate
balance is therefore the mix of instruments that maximises our
impact on poverty reduction and development within financial and
human resource constraints.
12. The strengths and weaknesses of the state-focus approach:
DFIDI's choice of focus-states; the level of DFIDI's engagement
with non-focus states
The 1999 Country Strategy Paper provided the framework for
DFIDI to develop a state focused approach, using poverty levels,
policy performance and relationship history (a proxy for comparative
advantage) as selection criteria. Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh,
Orissa and West Bengal were selected and remain our partner states.
The strength of the state focus is the technical value-added at
the state level, depending on the nature of the dialogue with
partner government. As stated in Para 1 (Case for aid) effectiveness
and additionality are more apparent at the state level.
At the same time, DFIDI recognises there are limitations
to the state based approach. The external review of our CSP suggested
that state partnerships, rather than being seen as a means to
an end, had become an objective in their own right. The review
highlighted some of the difficulties our focus on partner states
had produced in our relations with the central government.
Taking these lessons into account, the 2004 CAP commits DFIDI
to developing an integrated approach to tackling poverty reduction
in the four states. DFIDI is also refashioning a strengthened
National programme that will transfer high levels of resources
through central programmes in key areas. This will allow us to
reach the poor in non-focus states, including Bihar and Uttar
Pradesh. It will also feature a more focused dialogue on over-arching
policies with line ministries and it will develop strategic partnerships
with other development agencies and civil society. DFID's National
programme will exploit synergies with state level programmes and
thus the work at both levels will be mutually reinforcing.
This is considered a better and more feasible option than
working directly in more states. Financial and human resource
constraints mean that DFIDI is not well placed to develop partnerships
with additional states or to continue projects in non-focus states.
We are studying ways of working in states with difficult policy
environments, which could inform strategy analyses for the next
CAP, including "silent partnerships" with other donors.
13. The impact of governance and political will on DFIDI
programmes and their vulnerability to changes in government
Both the CAP and individual projects/programmes go through
a thorough process of design and approval and are based on available
analysis of long-term trends and implications. They are not considered
significantly vulnerable to changes in governments.
Despite being a robust democracy, there are concerns about
governance and the political will for sustained reforms in India.
If public services are to improve, sustained reforms are necessary
to reduce excessive regulation, and wasteful expenditures that
have led to high fiscal deficits.
DFIDI's approach has been to work with pro-reform constituents
within government. Our programme supports GoI and state government
efforts to improve governance, in particular service delivery
to the poor. By working with civil society to strengthen accountability
and the "voice" of the poor, we plan to widen our approach
to the promotion of growth and improvement of services.
F. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
14. The implications of India's "modernisation"
for poverty reduction: harnessing economic growth
The marked acceleration of both economic growth and poverty
reduction in the 1980s and 1990s has been associated with an increasingly
open economy. Market reforms have exposed Indian industry to greater
competition and facilitated access to managerial and technical
know-how. India has emerged as a global leader with strong comparative
advantage in IT and IT-enabled services (particularly Business
Process Outsourcing). Some sections of Indian manufacturing have
also demonstrated capacity to compete successfully at an international
level on both quality and price. These trends are likely to continue,
with positive benefits both in terms of growth and poverty reduction.
Major policy challenges remain, however, if India is to successfully
accelerate the reform and modernisation of the economy particularly
in those sectors with the greatest poverty reducing potential;
these sectors include agriculture and labour-intensive manufacturing
where many of the poor are concentrated. Following recent changes
in the structure of the economy, there has been evidence of a
slowdown in the rate of employment generation; a decline in the
share of agriculture; stabilisation of the industrial share; and
a rise in the share of services. However, the contribution of
these key sectors to growth and poverty reduction is currently
limited by a range of policy, regulatory and infrastructural constraints,
the removal of which should be a high priority.
15. The role of trade and the private sector
India's share of world trade remains very low compared
to China and USA. However, recent growth rates of exports are
amongst the highest in the world, suggesting that India may finally
realise its trade potential.
While the precise links between trade and poverty reduction
are debated, some developmental benefits are likely. Growth of
export-oriented sectors that employ unskilled workers will benefit
the poor. A recent study also suggests that liberalisation of
certain sectors, coupled with reduction in agricultural subsidies
and protection measures could have significant poverty reduction
effects in India (Cline, to be published).
DFIDI engages on trade issues by working with other agencies
that have a comparative advantage in the sector. For example,
DFIDI in partnership with UNCTAD (Pro poor Globalisation Support
Fund) is financing a major programme to build capacities of government
and civil society organisations on trade issues.
The private sector in India is increasingly adopting
a more proactive role in addressing issues of urban and rural
poverty as well as corporate social responsibility. The opportunities
and challenges of globalization, information technology as well
as new ways of doing business have opened up areas for innovative
partnership approaches to many of India's long-standing development
issues. The sector has also begun to recognize the value of engaging
with the poor as viable business partners—both in their
role as consumers and producers.
DFIDI also recognises the role of the private sector as a
potential stakeholder in policy change. We will complement other
partners in supporting private sector activities that have a positive
impact on the poor. Where appropriate, we will also support government
in working with the sector to explore new approaches to service
provision, and improving regulation.
DFID also submitted several annexes with this memorandum.
These have not been printed, but have been placed in the Library,
and are listed in the front of this volume.
May 2004
| 
