Community-driven development decision tools for rural - IFAD

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Part B.CDD project design decisions45
VIIThe scope of CDD projectsKey decisions about componentsRural development projects typically finance one or more areas of intervention, including• training and capacity-building;• agricultural technology generation;• micro-business skills and marketing development;• transport and social infrastructure;• production and marketing infrastructure;• rural financial services.CDD project designers must decide• which areas of intervention to include;• how to organize the areas in structuring the project;• which activities within each area will be project-led and which ones will bedemand-driven;• the extent to which the menu of projects offered to the communities will be open;• whether there is the need for a pilot phase;• whether the project should cover a subregion, a region, or the entire country;• whether rural financial services and microenterprise development should be included in asingle project or supported under a separate parallel project;• to what extent CBOs can be financed;• whether grants or loans should be used to finance each activity in transferring public fundsto the CBOs.CDD and technology innovationTechnological innovations affect producers differently. The expected positive performance of anew technology often rests on the assumption that producers sell the largest part of their outputin the market for cash and that they operate in areas where there is a marginal risk of crop failuredue to climatic vagaries. But IFAD’s target group is small-scale farmers for whom such conditionsdo not always apply. The bulk of their output is for household consumption, while only arelatively small share is sold in the market. Therefore they may not be able to recover the largerrecurrent costs of the innovation. The risk of crop failure is often significant for producers whooperate very small plots of land that are far from the market in marginal areas and which areoften subject to pests and diseases that are difficult to control. In addition, small-scale farmersoften have inadequate knowledge about or bargaining power with suppliers of specialized inputs,which tends to increase the cost of purchasing inputs and reduce the chances of selling at goodprices. As a result, the advantage of innovative technologies for small-scale farmers may bedrastically limited.It is therefore important that the design of a technological innovation fits the capability of theproject’s target group. It is necessary to research how specific innovations can improve thepotential of the targeted producers and to develop correct estimations of the advantages for thecommunity-level producers. CDD projects have often devoted a component (or part of a subcomponent)to this area, but seldom with sufficient attention and determination for success. Inpractice, technological innovation has either been excluded or dealt with in a very general wayduring programme design, leaving the definition of a specific action to the implementationphase. This situation has often delayed action, failed to concentrate on research dealing withproblems of the target group and generated few effective results.46
Page 1 and 2: Community-driven developmentdecisio
Page 3 and 4: The opinions expressed in this publ
Page 5 and 6: PART B. CDD PROJECT DESIGN DECISION
Page 8: ForewordThe CDD Decision Tools is t
Page 11 and 12: What is CDD?A definition of communi
Page 13 and 14: mechanisms on a list of priority ne
Page 15 and 16: Figure 1Example of decision tree on
Page 17 and 18: ICDD’s emphasis on communitiesand
Page 19 and 20: The answer to the second question i
Page 21 and 22: IICDD and local governanceDefinitio
Page 23 and 24: communities and local governance in
Page 25 and 26: IIIPoverty focus of CDDIFAD’s spe
Page 27 and 28: The way that partnership is negotia
Page 29 and 30: Risk of elite captureNon-exclusion
Page 31 and 32: Elite capture by local, professiona
Page 33 and 34: Box 17Lessons learned about targeti
Page 35: Poverty and poor resilience against
Page 38 and 39: espect. For the political setting t
Page 40 and 41: IFAD’s CDD projects do not need g
Page 42 and 43: domain of a community or a small cl
Page 44 and 45: Government procedures andprocesses
Page 48 and 49: To link community development and t
Page 50 and 51: CDD and production and marketing in
Page 52 and 53: Table 2Degrees of CDD in rural fina
Page 54 and 55: Partnership issues in CDD projectsV
Page 56 and 57: eduction when there is government d
Page 58 and 59: The government ideally should inclu
Page 60 and 61: the CBOs (i.e. VDCs and different t
Page 62 and 63: territory that may include several
Page 64 and 65: Implementation arrangementsfor CDD
Page 68 and 69: • conformance with conditions imp
Page 70 and 71: A larger CDD content is achieved by
Page 72 and 73: Sustainable arrangements tofinance
Page 74 and 75: contribution to building a sustaina
Page 76 and 77: Financing projects through CSOs of
Page 78 and 79: Managing CDD projectsXIMost common
Page 80 and 81: Managing expectations about paceDur
Page 82 and 83: management. In many cases, the meth
Page 84: political or project management int
Page 87 and 88: A note on fiscal decentralization1.
Page 89 and 90: to use the money in the way it deci
Page 92 and 93: Appendix 291
Page 94 and 95: targeting around 30 per cent of the
Page 96 and 97:
In both Mali and Guinea, the interv
Page 98 and 99:
25. Mansuri, G.; Vijayendra Rao. 20
Page 101 and 102:
CONTACTSMohamed ManssouriCountry Pr
show all

Community-driven development decision tools for rural - IFAD

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?