Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Ways in which WTO Restricts Development Policy Choices
• Industrial policy
o Export promotion subsidies
• Copying and adaption of technology
• Tariff Protection
o Response: to listen to complaints and incorporate in very interesting and clever ways into
policy and practice.
The Concern for Poverty Reduction
• Civil society organizations (CSOs)
o All organizations and citizen activity that operates between the individual and the state
o Multitude of civil society, community based organization, community/student
organizations, operates between the individual and the state
o Trade: NOT civil society organization.
Does not consider business associations to be civil society organizations.
• Non-governmental organizations (NGOs)
o Subset of civil society organization, non-profit, driven by task-orientated leadership,
involved in service and humanitarian functions.
o Advocate for citizens, lobby government, encourage people to participate and organize.
Most organized around specific organization.
o Provide services with the withdrawal of the state. Many started during the 1980s, where
poverty increased, began as grass root organizations, providing food to the poor. 90s,
received funding, took upon themselves on providing services, health care, and etc.
o Many are international, if not then would have international partners. (gives ability to
operate internationally and lobby all international organizations)
WB: dealing with poverty & criticism that SAPS had been implemented not
through democratic process.
Hard for countries to adhere and have ownership of policies.
Social Investment Funds
• Main Features
o World bank funded (by 1995, funds operated in 32 countries, today, in about 50 different
countries and over 100 programs)
o Infrastructure (building for roads), social services (health care, training for employment),
microfinance(lending to small businesses)
o Started as emergency measures (first in Bolivia 1985, privatization in mining and large
unemployment. First case WB recognized. Made loan to provide first funding to the very
o Participation (channeled through local government/agencies that were set up for this
Make proposal of design of programs.Also involved in the implementation of the
Ownership, local communities would own the program. Speedy way of
addressing poverty and social issues in poor communities.
Criticisms of Social Funds • Do not help the extremely poor
• Benefits may be captured by local elites
• Substitute for government services
• Used for political purposes
o Who determines who gets what and how much?
• Do not challenge
The World Bank and Social Capital
• Definition: set of associations between people consisting of social networks and associated
o Idea of participation with basic consumption of neoliberalism
o Stresses the idea of self-help, independent from state
o Shifting the onest development from the state to the community.
• Enters into the discussion of SIFs
o SIF was opportunity to develop social capital.
o Social capital as important in capital alleviation.
• Incorporates and tames the notion of societal participation in policy
o NGO’s deliver services
By 1987, the WB report talking about important of increasing role of NGOs in
order to meet the service required.
o Supports the idea of “good governance”
Furthered because the participation of NGO’s at local level will act as check on
the power of state.
SIF and idea of SC, greeted with great deal of positive response, including outside
of the bank and CSOs.
Criticism of the Bank’s Notion of Social Capital
• Social inequalities are largely ignored
o Social capital has own view of the community, everyone produce equally
o Missed gender inequality. Depended on women volunteering to engage in delivery of
services. Issue: Women in GS, already overburdened, making income, and now WB
thinks they have time to devote to voluntary organizations.Attempt to exploit women
even more, deepened inequality and poverty.
• Responsibility for development rests with the poor
o Ignored the impact of stabilization, SAPS, national policies responded. Overlooks the
• Ignores power and politics
o Can have vibrant social communication and all social capital in the world. If have
government that are not interested in impact of participation of local communities, how
can the vibrancy have an impact on policy?
o Mexico: unintended opportunity. Creating opportunity to small degree of mobilization.
After SIF has been in effect for 5-6 years, government was afraid of it because people
were having demands and someone will listen. Didn’t have mechanism of putting a lid on
demands. Dropped the program, this being one of the reason. Conditional Cash Transfer Programs (CCTs)
• Around 30 countries with it, WB funds 13 countries
• Economic crisis in 2008, these programs are in the upswing.
• Cash (very small amount) to (female) heads of households in exchange for certain conditions
o Much more targeted than SIF.
o CCTs would get to the extremely poor, obligations (conditions) include
Keeping kids in school, taking kids to health care clinics (regular basis)
Also build human capital
o Goes into poor communities and conduct a survey, specific cut off, if under it, will
receive cash funding.
o The Chilean cash program has over 50 conditions.
o Poverty is more complicated
o NGO wanted poor people to be involved too (poor people understands other poor people
o Market will reduce moderate poverty
Didn’t want money to go to moderately poor. Must be extremely poor
Moderate poor is still poor, can’t leave them out.
Mexico: National tortilla subsidies, bottom 40% can have it. Top 60% eat bread
Removed the subsidies and moved pert of it to the CCTs to the extremely poor.
(thought the moderately poor could afford tortillas, waste of money funding them)
o Sole use of income for inclusion
o Can divide families and communities
Can harm social capital. Deciding to give funds to female head on the household,
can engender violence.
Need strategy for employment. Handing over money in context that man cannot
have employment. Violence toward women (w