nextI always wondered what happens to the marginalized children
when they used up their UNICEF supplied exercise books, erasers, and pencils, or
took that last UNICEF supplied Vitamin pill. Will UNICEF supply another round of
commodities? Will the Government buy pencils for everyone? Are parents expected
to buy exercise books for their children? How long do we have to provide
essential commodities, before the country takes over?
To supply consumables – in a development setting[1] – is connected to
the assumption that eventually someone else will take over. And if this is a
realistic assumption, why do we provide those commodities in the first place?
Why don’t we go sustainable right from start?
If we were to consistently apply Results Based Management with its dreaded
logical approach, the logframes would turn up many of those assumptions. And the
success of the project would not be measured according to whether children go to
school while we supply exercise books, but whether they go to school and learn
something even after we stopped providing school supplies.
An important result of our development cooperation is to have countries realize
that essential commodities are necessary for the enjoyment of children’s rights.
And that they will have found sustainable ways of making essential commodities
accessible and affordable to families who are poor and marginalized.
Supplying commodities as part of a development cooperation programme should be a
means of last resort. But the challenge is to go beyond supply planning and
purchase ordering, and to advise governments on tax reforms, subsidies and
private sector development. I guess there is a lot of ground to be covered by
economists, analysts of local and international trade, Country Offices, and the
Essential Commodity Division before all children can enjoy their basic goods.
[1] This thought does not apply in situations of emergency, or limited-duration campaigns.
(12 March 2004)
previous
next