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

134
Import support (late 1980s)
In the late 1980s Sweden was one of the providers to an administratively
allocated import support scheme. With the scarcity of foreign exchange in the
economy during this period, receiving an allocation under this scheme was
highly attractive. A significant part of the Swedish resources was allocated to
projects or enterprises also receiving Swedish development assistance through
other co-operation modalities. A free quota element, to be allocated by a
committee in the Ministry of Finance was also included. This import support
scheme was however highly bureaucratic and lacked transparency. Donors
found that a number of importers received foreign exchange without paying
any of the required counterpart funds in Tshs. The accountancy system and
the auditing of the scheme became extremely tense issues in the development
dialogue, and lack of information created increasing mistrust. The notion of
partnership was far away. With very slow progress in the dialogue Sweden and
other donors eventually decided to temporarily end this aid modality.
During the 1980s, in the wake of the debt crisis, IMF stabilisation programmes
and World Bank Structural Adjustment Programmes, emerged as a new modality.
This was the hey-day of aid conditionality. The dialogue had mainly
narrowed into a monologue; sometimes the dialogue remaining was that between
the World Bank local office and its headquarters in Washington.
The ‘home-grown’ structural adjustment programme (early 1980s)
An interesting example of policy dialogue between the Government of Tanzania
and the Nordic countries resulted in an attempt to establish the home-grown
structural adjustment plan of 1982–85. This was seen as an alternative to what
was expected from the Bretton Woods institutions. The background was the breakdown
in the relations between Tanzania and the IMF in 1979 and the subsequent
problems in the relations with the World Bank and some other donors.
This exercise was based on strong trust between the partners, and a recognition
by the Government of Tanzania that structural adjustment was needed,
not only in order to increase the rapidly shrinking flow of development
assistance, but also for sustainable development. The Nordic countries financed
an expert group that in co-operation with Tanzanian authorities
presented a plan that was endorsed by the Government, which however did
not manage to implement it. Thereafter even the Nordic countries took the
position that the Governments of Tanzania had to come to an agreement
with the IMF, as a prerequisite for continued development co-operation.
While the Nordic initiative failed to provide an implemented structural
adjustment programme, it is considered to have contributed to bridging the
gap between Tanzania and the IFIs. This would probably have taken a longer
time without the previous attempt, which was based on a trustful dialogue
between the Governments of Tanzania and the Nordic countries.