How do IRED texts articulate the quest for autonomy with the need for “another form of development” and a “new partnership”? What vision of this renewed partnership is proposed?
In response to the question of the articulation between the quest for autonomy, the need for “another development” and the emergence of a “new partnership”, here is an in-depth analysis based on the source documents.
AUTONOMY AS THE BASIS OF “ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT” #
The authors of the source documents present autonomy, mainly financial but also political and institutional, as a sine qua non condition for the implementation of “another development”. They strongly criticize the dependence of DOs/NGOs from the South on international aid, emphasizing that this dependence perpetuates a development model that does not always correspond to the needs and priorities of local populations.
- Financial dependence is seen as an obstacle to the ability of DOs/NGOs to define and implement their own development strategies. Donors, with their project-based approach, often direct the actions of DOs/NGOs toward objectives and modalities that do not promote the creation of equity capital or long-term self-financing. This approach is described by Bernard Lecomte as poorly suited to mobilizing the beneficiaries’ own efforts and designed outside the real context of the action.
- The authors emphasize that “alternative development” must emanate from the populations themselves, based on an analysis of their needs and controlled by them. Financial autonomy allows DOs/NGOs to free themselves from donor imperatives and focus on promoting self-promotion and community-led development.
- Autonomy is also political, as grassroots civil society organizations have been marginalized from decision-making for too long. “Another development” requires that these organizations have more say in the dialogue and decisions that affect their future. Institutional autonomy, for its part, involves strengthening the internal capacities of civil society organizations/NGOs to manage effectively and define their own priorities.
Fernand Vincent points out that 95% of NGOs in the South depend on aid and would disappear without it, making the need to build partnerships with aid agencies while developing financial autonomy all the more urgent. The goal is not to condemn aid, but to make it more effective by placing it at the service of empowerment.
THE “NEW PARTNERSHIP” AS A VECTOR OF AUTONOMY AND “ALTERNATE DEVELOPMENT” #
Faced with the limitations of traditional aid and the need to promote “alternative development,” the authors propose a “new partnership” between Southern DOs/NGOs and various development actors, including Northern donors, governments, the private sector, and banks. This renewed partnership is designed to overcome dependency relationships and promote the autonomy of Southern organizations.
The vision of this new partnership is based on several key elements:
- Refocus the objective on partner autonomy: Northern NGOs must move from a simple approach of project funding to long-term support aimed at strengthening the financial, economic, cultural, and political autonomy of Southern DOs/NGOs. This involves planning with partners for the “end of aid” by helping them generate their own income and capital.
- Changing aid methods: There is a need to shift from a rigid project-based approach to more flexible forms of financing, such as flexible funds, revolving funds, and bank guarantees. Aid should also facilitate the building of reserves and capital within DOs/NGOs. Cooperation agencies should agree to finance the “unfundable,” such as essential operating costs and initial study costs.
- Establishing a relationship of equality and trust: The new partnership requires donors to consider Southern DOs/NGOs as adult partners, to be listened to and negotiated with. This implies better dialogue, greater transparency, and consideration of the priorities of Southern organizations.
- Power sharing and co-management: Some authors suggest co-management mechanisms for funds, where donors and beneficiaries would be equally represented in decision-making. This would allow for real sharing of the power that money confers and strengthen the accountability of local actors.
- Valuing local efforts: The new partnership must recognize and support the local efforts of organizations in the South, whether in kind, labor, or money, as a starting point for development. External aid must complement this local effort.
- Development of innovative financial mechanisms: The authors explore various avenues for financing development “differently”, such as the mobilization of local savings, counterpart funds for debt repurchase, “endowment” funds, and the development of income-generating economic activities by the DOs/NGOs themselves.
ROLE OF THE DIFFERENT ACTORS #
Southern development organizations/NGOs must become more professional, adopt a “development enterprise” mentality, strengthen their management, and focus on creating economic activities. Self-management and participation are essential.
- Northern NGOs/DOs must transform their mentality and practices, focusing on the autonomy of their Southern partners and combating underdevelopment in the North as well.
- Southern governments must support the self-reliance initiatives of DOs/NGOs.
- The private sector needs to be more involved by opening markets and providing financing.
- Banks, including development banks, must adapt their products and services to the needs of DOs/NGOs.
- International aid must evolve its financing methods towards greater flexibility and support for capitalization.
In conclusion, the source documents strongly link the quest for autonomy of DOs/NGOs with the need for “another development” that is more endogenous and adapted to local realities. The “new partnership” is the strategy proposed to achieve this autonomy, by redefining the relationships between development actors on a basis of equality, trust and long-term support, favoring capacity building and the creation of own resources rather than simple dependence on project-based aid.
