Public Sector Governance and Accountability Series: Budgeting and ...

458 Salvatore Schiavo-Campo
Moreover, as mentioned earlier, transparency, consultation, and
participation are even more important in a postconflict environment than
in a stable situation. External feedback and civil society involvement, in
some appropriate form and as permitted by the security realities on the
ground, are an essential part of rebuilding a national consensus and creating
positive forms of social capital, as well as a requirement for the effective
implementation of reconstruction activities. The form of civil society
involvement will depend on the sector and the region, but some mechanism
to systematically obtain external participation and reality checks is essential.
Because postconflict reconstruction is inherently a top-down affair, caution
must be exercised lest existing NGO activities and local structures be inadvertently
suffocated by the reconstruction assistance. Beyond protecting
what exists, government and donors should make efforts to incorporate into
the reconstruction program the contribution of local communities and of
the local and international NGOs that have been laboring in the conflict
vineyards for years. The potential contribution of NGOs and civil society
goes much beyond assisting in implementation or even acting directly as
implementing agencies. Some of the most effective components of postconflict
reconstruction programs in the past have relied on empowerment
of local communities and their partnership with NGOs. Moreover, capacity
building at the local level is a necessary condition for the evolution of the
rule of law, accountability, and transparency, and local structures can be
essential to underpin the gradual rebuilding of the social capital destroyed
by the conflict.
In conclusion, however well the urgent needs of the postconflict
transition are handled through the budget process, the need for quick and
visible achievements must not be allowed to short-circuit long-term
institutional development. Even the simplest and most pragmatic approach
to budgeting must facilitate moving in the direction of developing a robust
institutional infrastructure for public expenditure management. Thus,
although the starting point of budgeting in a postconflict situation must be
to meet the immediate postconflict needs and limitations, the good
budgeting practices described in the previous chapters do provide a vision
of the end point toward which all interventions ought to move.
Notes
This chapter is based partly on the analysis and conclusions of the following documents
and articles: Eriksson (2001); Sørbø and others (1998); Woodward (1995); and various
governmental and World Bank studies, particularly Operations Evaluation Department