Dialogue in Pursuit of Development - Are you looking for one of ...

130
between the developing partners, which are not directly related to actual
projects or programmes, but to policies or other external circumstances that
shape the framework of those activities. Traditionally the main context for
this dialogue has been annual consultations and other high level meetings.
This is however also changing.
The Swedish Embassy in Dar es Salaam belongs to those ‘pilot cases’ to
which decision making has been delegated from the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and Sida headquarters in Stockholm. This means that Sweden is trying
to establish conditions for dialogue as a continuous process. Furthermore,
a similar decentralisation process is visible among other donors. With
enhanced co-operation between donors at the local level, the policy dialogue
may thus often be conducted by a group of donors and the Government
of Tanzania. The continuous process makes the dialogue more informed
and reduces the transaction costs of all participants. The flip side, from the
Tanzanian point of view is a stronger continuous pressure on key decision
makers.
Dialogue is closely linked to two other concepts: partnership and ownership.
Partnership refers to the quality of development co-operation. It has as
such to be based on common basic values and mutual trust, allowing for
open discussions, where co-operating partners respect the existence of differing
interests. As president Mkapa of Tanzania has pointed out, genuine
partnership cannot be akin to that of a horse and its rider. Nor can it share
the profits, but not the risks (Mkapa, 1999). Ownership is the level of control
that the receiving government or other stakeholders in development
co-operation have over the content, conditions, planning and implementation
of a specific activity undertaken in development co-operation. The logic
of full ownership contains full responsibility for implementation. Dialogue
can be the process in which the content of the partnership is identified. The
balance between the two partners in the dialogue depends on the level of
ownership of the activity. Finally, there exists a fourth concept that in many
respects is in contradiction to these three, namely conditionality. This concept
is strongly related to the structural adjustment programmes, launched
by the World Bank in the 1980s. Although conditions are formally agreed
upon by the partners, they are de facto defined and decided by the donor,
while the recipient feels it has to accept the conditions in order to receive
the resources.
Trust is a basic prerequisite for partnership and a fruitful dialogue. Trust is
at the same time something, which can only be built up during a long period
of co-operation. Trust is something fragile and also susceptible to factors
outside the development co-operation framework. Change of government
may change a donor’s policy significantly. One recent example from
Denmark shows that the result can be interrupted bilateral development
co-operation in some countries. A change of government on the recipient
side may also imply that previous distrust from the donors is replaced with