Current approaches to integrated rural development, notes

PAST ATTEMPTS BY DONOR AGENCIES TO STIMULATE IRD HAVE OFTEN RESULTED IN HELPING FARMERS WHO PRODUCE FOR MARKET SALES, RATHER THAN THE POOR FARMERS WHOSE PRODUCTION IS USED FOR SUBSISTENCE. SUCH PROGRAMS HAVE NOT ACHIEVED THEIR MAJOR OBJECTIVE. THIS PAPER RECOMMENDS THAT DONORS SHOULD SELECT PROJECTS MORE CAREFULLY; THEY MUST STUDY THE POLITICAL CLIMATE AND FIND OUT WHICH FARMERS THE PROJECT WILL BENEFIT. THE DONOR AGENCY MUST EVOLVE AND ACCEPT A NEW DEFINITION OF ECONOMIC PROGRESS -- A DEFINITION THAT INCLUDES FOOD PRODUCTION, THE DISTRIBUTION OF PRODUCTION, AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF NON-PRODUCTIVE RURAL SERVICES. THE DONOR AGENCY SHOULD SHIFT FROM TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS AND SHOULD CONCENTRATE ON BUILDING LOCAL INSTITUTIONS AND SYSTEMS THROUGH WHICH PEOPLE CAN GAIN ACCESS TO THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SYSTEM OF THE COUNTRY. A DONOR AGENCY MUST BE WILLING TO HAVE THE HOST COUNTRY SET THE DIRECTION FOR THE PROGRAM; IT SHOULD CONFINE ITSELF TO EVALUATING AND SUPPORTING LOCALLY INITIATED PROJECTS. FINALLY, EXISTING INFORMATION CONCERNING IRD PROJECTS NEEDS TO BE ANALYZED AND CODIFIED. A DONOR AGENCY SHOULD CONSIDER APPOINTING A TASK FORCE TO EVALUATE AVAILABLE INFORMATION ON WHAT HAS WORKED, WHAT HAS NOT WORKED, AND THE REASONS WHY.