Making Rural Development Work for the Poor Strategic Policy Workshop

Background

This workshop was the second in a series of encounters convened by the World Bank, with financial support from the Government of Finland, for the purpose of facilitating dialogue between the Bank and civil society on key global development issues. The first workshop in the series was held in May 2002, and examined issues of trade, following the Fourth Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organisation held in Doha in 2001. This second workshop focused on rural poverty, livelihoods and development strategies, seeking to obtain informed perspectives on the World Bank’s policies and operations in these domains. It also sought to identify opportunities for improving consultation, collaboration and information exchange between civil society actors and the World Bank on strategic rural development issues. Workshop participants.

The workshop was conceived as an informal forum for an open and frank exchange of views between rural development practitioners, researchers and policy makers. While the workshop was placed against the background of the recent preparation and adoption of the World Bank’s new strategy for rural development entitled Reaching the Rural Poor, its purpose was not to make specific inputs into the strategy or into its implementation (2). Outside of the formal consultative processes that the Bank initiates and supports, this workshop aimed at providing a moment and a place for constructive and open debate around critical issues.

The design and organisation of this event benefited greatly from an extensive and well-structured process (3), under the guidance of a Steering Committee comprising representatives of the Bank and civil society organisations in the South and in Europe (4). This Steering Committee paid particular attention to the identification of key themes and issues, the design of the process to be followed in the workshop, and the selection of participants and resource persons.

The workshop: process and participants
The workshop began on the evening of Monday 19 May, and ended on the afternoon of Wednesday 21 May. It was structured around three main sets of activities:

• on the evenings of 19 and 20 May, presentations were made by members of the World Bank’s Agriculture and Rural Development Department (5), for the purpose of outlining current policies and programmes, and of presenting the Bank’s new rural development strategy. Each presentation was followed by a response by one of the civil society representatives (6). These sessions provided useful background on the context and content of Bank policies and operations, and on the issues and perspectives that require debate and investigation;
  
• on 20 May and on the morning of 21 May, key themes were explored in greater detail in five successive sessions addressing issues of particular relevance to meeting the needs of poor rural people. All these sessions followed a similar format, with one civil society participant providing a background presentation and a framework for discussion. Plenary discussions followed, in which positions were stated and issues were raised. In response to these, World Bank representatives provided additional information and views on the Bank’s perspectives and activities;
  
• on the afternoon of 21 May, participants discussed and identified a number of steps and activities that should be undertaken as follow-up to this workshop.

An independent resource person facilitated these discussions. The workshop followed Chatham House rules, whereby individual contributions may be recorded but cannot be attributed. This report provides a summary of the issues raised and points made in two days of lively and constructive deliberations. While discussions were centred on five themes, a number of general observations and conclusions emerged from this workshop, including important domains of disagreement, as well as significant areas of consensus. The richness of these debates came, in large part, from the openness of all participants and from the diversity of views expressed. Interestingly, such diversity existed even within the group of civil society representatives, who brought a wealth of insights and experiences to the discussion.

Session 1: International trade and economic policies
This theme was introduced by Nazneen Kanji, Senior Research Associate of the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), who examined how rural strategies relate to or conflict with international economic and trade policies. She identified a number of critical issues, especially in the context of global trade reform in agriculture. She ended her intervention with four key questions and challenges:

• What are the policies and interventions that are needed to enable less powerful small and medium rural producers and enterprises to benefit from international trade?
• What is the role of local and regional markets?
• Who participates in making trade policy?
• What kinds of information and assessments are required to inform trade policy?

From this presentation and the ensuing discussion, the workshop concluded that the global policy context remains extremely unfavourable to poor people and poor countries: there are growing inequities and disparities within and between nations, rural poverty is increasing in many parts of the world, particularly in Africa, global institutional arrangements and power relations are further marginalising poor countries and communities, conflicts are proliferating at national and regional levels, and the HIV/AIDS pandemic is having dramatic impacts on many economies and societies, especially in Africa.

This global context is determined and shaped, to a large extent, by processes of trade reform and liberalisation. In this workshop, diverse views were expressed in this regard, ranging from a questioning of the very premise of trade liberalisation, to the view that such reform is now indispensable to promote growth and combat poverty. Most participants however agreed that trade reform has not delivered the benefits that its proponents have been advocating, and that some countries are now poorer as a result of the impact of trade liberalisation on their economies.

While many participants agreed that trade liberalisation has the potential to benefit developing countries and poor people, the workshop expressed the view that such benefits are not automatic, and that they cannot be generated without control mechanisms at the global and regional levels, and without complementary policies at the national level. The workshop therefore concluded that there is a need for approaches and conditions that are suited to specific regions and countries. It also agreed that trade reform cannot and should not be an end in itself: it can only be a means to an end, and it is not always the most appropriate means to achieve development, equity and sustainability.

The workshop noted that existing trade arrangements are unfair and that they have dramatic negative impacts on poor countries, effectively contradicting the stated principles and objectives of trade liberalisation. Of primary concern is the issue of subsidies to agricultural production in OECD countries, amounting to more than USD 300 billion per year. This has led to the perverse state of affairs where producers in the countries of the European Union receive nearly $1.20 a day in subsidies per head of cattle (amounting to almost $436/year per animal), while some 1.3 billion of the world’s poor people live on less than a dollar a day. This situation is responsible for the destruction or marginalisation of agricultural production in many parts of the developing world. The workshop remarked and welcomed the fact that the World Bank has, on several recent occasions, publicly expressed the position that these subsidies have negative impacts and that these policies need to be changed.

While it paid much attention to subsidies and their negative consequences, the workshop noted that there are a number of other policies and practices that are inherent to current trade arrangements and that are highly detrimental to poor countries and their agricultural production. These include non-trade barriers, dumping of excess in production, misuse of food aid, export credits, and the overall dominance and excessive power of corporations. The workshop concluded that there is no level playing field in international trade, and that this is one of the factors responsible for rural poverty.

The governance of international trade arrangements is dominated by the United States, the European Union and Japan, who are primarily responsible for the protectionist policies that impact negatively on poor countries. At the same time, it remains important to recognise that developing countries themselves use trade barriers to compete in support of their agricultural production. Trade liberalisation must therefore be a gradual process that is tailored to the specific situation of individual countries and regions.

Several developing countries and regions are indeed placed at a disadvantage in global and regional trade, because of a number of structural obstacles, including capacity, information, infrastructure and institutional arrangements. These inequities in access to trade cannot be addressed without some form of public support, and without significant efforts and investments in capacity-building, public sector reform and governance, infrastructure development and capacity-building in developing countries.

The workshop noted the complexity of trade negotiations, and the dangers of expanding and burdening the World Trade Organisation (WTO) agenda with new issues (such as environment and labour) that are certainly critical but can perhaps be addressed better through other instruments. The workshop highlighted the weak capacity of some states to participate effectively in negotiations, and the negative consequences of this reality.

Discussions in the workshop frequently highlighted the need to denounce and resist the ideology of “market fanaticism” that continues to dominate much of the international development agenda. Several interventions noted that the three main sectors (i.e. the market, the state and civil society) have complementary roles to play in the development process, that one sector cannot “do it alone”, and that it is a dangerous illusion to think that the market can solve social problems.

Session 2: Making markets work for the poor
The second thematic session of the workshop focused on how to make markets work for the rural poor, and was introduced by Julio Berdegué of the Red Internacional de Metodología de Investigación de Sistemas de Producción (RIMISP). In this introduction, rural markets were defined, and strategies for reforming markets were presented. In the presentation and in the discussions that followed, it was noted that the rural poor have a weak capacity and a lack of opportunity to act and intervene in the market, and that the current rules of the trade game are clearly opposed to the needs and interests of poor rural people.

The presentation confirmed the extent to which structural market trends have profound negative impacts on the poor. While these issues need to be addressed at international levels, there is also a need for domestic policies that protect local producers from the impacts of subsidies and other policies in the North, and there is a need to regulate large trans-national interests in food processing and retail. Specific strategies and actions are therefore needed to support the capacities of the poor, and the following were identified.

There is first a need for strong and pro-active policies to develop institutional capacities in poor countries, particularly in relation to making financial markets accessible, improving the efficiency of legal systems, promoting local development and decentralisation, establishing standards, and guaranteeing the transparency of domestic markets. Interestingly, these are policies that do not have a specific rural focus, but that are indispensable to support pro-poor rural development.

The workshop also noted the importance of local and regional markets, and highlighted the dangers of an exclusive and exaggerated focus on international trade and high-value products, as reflected in many international policies and initiatives, including those of the World Bank. Experience has indeed shown that the entry of farmers into export markets, especially through the production of high value and non-traditional export crops, can have positive impacts, but that it can also have negative effects, placing farmers and their production effectively under the control of exporters and large producers, and placing them at the mercy of uncertain and erratic markets.

There is therefore a need for deliberate policies and actions that support these local and regional markets, with less emphasis on standards and more emphasis on local capacity-building, infrastructure and changes in patterns of consumption. There is also a need for support to local processing, in order to add value to agricultural production and to substitute imports. At the same time, there is a need for more accountability and transparency in large agro-industries, in order to minimise their negative impacts on small producers.

Session 3: Ownership and control of land resources for rural development
This theme was introduced by Camilla Toulmin, Senior Fellow of the International Institute for Environment and Development, who defined the concept of land and highlighted its relevance to rural development, examined the various types of rights that apply to the land resource as well as the sources of these rights, and identified the main constituents and directions of land policy. She concluded with an identification of several bi-lateral and multi-lateral initiatives in land reform, and with a number of questions and issues, particularly related to the contribution of land to pro-poor growth.

This session focused exclusively on issues of land tenure, land development and land management, but it acknowledged that there are other natural resources that are critical to rural development and that require a suitable policy framework to govern access and use. Among these, water is particularly important, and the workshop agreed that this theme would deserve a separate discussion.

Land issues remain at the very centre of rural development. While there have been many initiatives in land reform in various parts of the world, there are few experiences, if any, that provide cases of complete and successful land reform processes. In many countries of the developing world, there are continuing processes of land concentration, in spite of official land reform programmes. Land reform certainly remains needed, but it must imperatively involve more than land redistribution and improved access. Land reform is only one part of agrarian reform. Issues of land use, management and administration are inherently political issues. In many countries, there is no clear political will for land reform.

The workshop also discussed market-based approaches to land reform, and noted that such approaches continue to dominate the discourse and the practice of many governments and development agencies. Yet experience has shown that these approaches do not favour poor people and usually lead to increased inequities and disparities. Several participants in the workshop also questioned the dominant policy to privatise land in order to attract investment, and noted the need for creative approaches to land tenure and land rights.

Important discussions took place around the issue of land rights, and participants highlighted significant cases where land titling processes have contributed directly to poverty reduction in rural areas. These processes, it was noted, must also include the securing of communal rights, and legal frameworks are clearly needed to secure rights and land titling at communal levels, as means to protect and strengthen collective rights. There is therefore a need for research to explore ways in which common property can be made more secure, and to define the appropriate balance between customary and statutory rights.

Experience has also shown that policies and programmes that secure access to land by women result in positive transformations of rural activity. In too many instances, women have insufficient access to land and other essential natural resources. There is therefore a need for policies and programmes that create changes in land tenure conditions, in order to enhance the livelihoods of women, and to impact positively on all aspects of farm production.

Land use is very often characterised by conflicts and competing rights. The workshop provided a number of examples, including cases where mining activities conflict with and impact negatively on rural communities and livelihoods. The special case of small island states and their complex coastal zone management issues was highlighted. Mention was also made of the impacts of conflicts and resulting migration, and on the need to respect the rights of migrants and refugees. In all these instances, there is a need for policies and approaches that recognise and strengthen the rights of the poor and vulnerable.

Land policies in many countries also have to face the reality of continued land fragmentation, to the point where parcels are becoming too small to support livelihoods. These processes of fragmentation can be made more difficult to manage because of customary law and the rights it confers. At the same time, there are many rural regions where there are large numbers of landless people, and the inescapable reality is that their needs could not be met without the development of economies that are not exclusively dependent on the land. This suggests the need for more research and more investment on non-farm rural activities.

The workshop also examined some of the issues that affect indigenous peoples. In many instances, the need is to establish and guarantee titles to territories, and to ensure that these territories correspond to political jurisdictions, that they build on traditional rights, and that they continue to respect and support communal identity (in cultural, linguistic and territorial terms). Too often, public policies do not take this reality into account.

The workshop noted the negative impact that many protected areas have had and continue to have on local communities and traditional users. Over the past few decades, the dominant approach to conservation has involved the exclusion of resources users who were dependent on the resources of these protected areas, even in instances when such uses were sustainable. The World Bank, through its financing of protected areas projects and programmes, has in the past played a negative role in a number of specific instances, and it needs to continue adopt a more progressive and integrated approach to biodiversity conservation.

While the workshop did not spend time on the critical issue of water management, it noted the need to establish access to water as a fundamental right, and to make sure that current approaches that consider water as a commodity do not deny this right.

Session 4: Budgets, poverty and rural development
Issues related to the financing of rural development and to the integration of financing mechanisms and approaches into national development strategies were introduced by John Samuel of the National Centre for Advocacy Studies in India, who highlighted the importance of budget analysis, provided a framework for such analyses, and presented four main challenges:

1. the capacity and credibility of civil society organisations to track public expenditure;
2. the development of accessible and easy-to-use tools to seek accountability and transparency;
3. the development of macro-micro linkages (grassroots – national – international);
4. the democratisation of knowledge.

This presentation and the ensuing discussion emphasised the fact that budgets are expressions of politics and policy priorities.

In this discussion, the workshop heard interesting accounts of experiences in several countries, where civil society organisations have been involved in participatory processes of budget analysis, tracking resource allocation and actual expenditure to assess budgetary contributions to poverty reduction. On the basis of such information, it becomes possible and desirable to inform the public and to generate demand for reform. In these processes, organisations such as the World Bank can play a role in supporting capacity-building and advocacy processes within civil society.

The discussion focused primarily on budgeting and financing processes and mechanisms that relate directly to the World Bank. In this respect, the workshop noted once again the significant reduction in the Bank’s rural spending and lending in recent years, and sought to identify the reasons for this pattern. While the impacts of broader policy forces were noted, a number of specific factors were also identified, including:

• the lack of “demand” for rural development investments and initiatives by borrowing countries; 
• the inability of the rural poor and other potential beneficiaries of rural development initiatives to influence that “demand” and to place their needs and priorities at the centre of policy making;
• the reluctance of many World Bank Country Directors to encourage and promote rural development initiatives;
• the risk frequently involved in rural development projects, often because of their environmental and social sensitivities;
• the costs of project preparation within Bank procedures, and the resulting reluctance of Bank officials to embark on the design of small and medium scale projects, even when such projects are preferable to large projects, as is often the case in rural development.

The workshop also looked at the Bank’s main programming and financing mechanisms, including the Poverty Reduction Support Credits (PRSC), focusing in particular on the opportunities for popular participation in policy and programme formulation. World Bank representatives noted that it is the responsibility of the governments to employ consultative and participatory approaches in the preparation of Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSP), and that the most the Bank can do is to provide encouragement and support the process when required to do so. The possibility of placing participation as conditionality in World Bank was mentioned, and it was recalled that the Bank’s Board recently rejected a recommendation to this effect, on the argument that the Bank should not be making judgements that are essentially of a political nature. While they accepted this fact, civil society participants noted that there are a number of formal and informal avenues that the Bank can use, if it really wants to, to influence these national processes towards more participation and more transparency.

In a brief discussion on the provision of budgetary support to borrowing states, World Bank representatives explained that there are mechanisms and procedures being used to track expenditure and ensure that such support reaches intended targets. Several civil society representatives however expressed concern over this approach, and noted that budget support merely serves to support the status quo and to support state operations in sectors that are not necessarily relevant to poverty reduction and social development. They further noted that such approaches have not worked in the past, and that they are ill-suited to the majority of cases in the developing world.

With respect to PRSPs and other policy and programming instruments, the workshop emphasised the importance of ownership, and civil society stressed the point that “government ownership” does not imply “people ownership”. Having reviewed one example of a national strategy that has received positive reviews, the workshop noted that:

• there are many strategies and programmes that do not have real “owners”, that remain perceived as originated and conceived from outside;
• many instances, the political directorate is not involved in the formulation of formal policies and programmes such as the PRSPs;
• mechanisms of social participation and control that exist on paper often do not function, because of political resistance or lack of capacity;
• the reality of strategy implementation often contradicts the rhetoric of policy documents.
  

With respect to the role of the private sector, it was observed that:

• there is a need for voluntary codes of conduct;
• there is a need for increased private sector involvement in rural development;
• the private sector has a role to play in advocacy, for example on the issue of agricultural subsidies.

From the sum of these observations, it was noted that civil society organisations have a particularly important role to play in:

• research and advocacy on national budgeting processes and instruments;
• development of monitoring indicators applicable to budget performance;
• participating (and advocating the need for participation) in PRSPs and similar policy processes;
• advocating for the placement of rural development at the centre of public policy and public sector programming.

Looking more specifically at the design of World Bank-funded programmes and projects, civil society participants stressed the need for increased civil society involvement, and for more support from the Bank in this respect.

Session 5: Governance, participation and inclusion
The theme of governance was introduced by Bara Gueye, Senior Research Associate in IIED-Sahel, who established the rationale for and context of participation in governance, identified a number of issues, challenges and opportunities, presented some of the implications for the World Bank, and proposed three priority issues for debate:

• how to scale up and institutionalise participatory process within national bureaucracies for the design and implementation of pro-poor rural development programmes?
• how to improve the accountability of programmes by strengthening the power and capacities of key stakeholders in monitoring and evaluation during implementation?
• what are the opportunities and constraints in institutionalising participatory monitoring and evaluation in the implementation of rural development programmes?

This presentation and the discussion that followed identified a number of the reasons why planning and implementation processes are not participatory,
especially as it relates to the actual control of the decision-making process, and to monitoring and evaluation. These reasons include:

• a focus on products rather than processes;
• the life cycle of most programmes, which is not tailored to take into account the requirements of a learning approach;
• accountability systems that are focused more on resource uses (the concern of donors) than on impacts (the concern of communities) ;
• the fact that most participatory planning processes are designed to validate a pre-defined strategy and approach set up by donors;
• a general resistance on the part of management agencies to give up power through participation, decentralisation and transparency;
• the inadequacy of funding allocated to consultative and participatory processes within projects and programmes.

The new systems of governance now need national frameworks to ensure that they are strong and sustainable. In many countries of the world, rights to participation are enshrined in constitutions, but they are not taken into consideration in practice. Changes in governance arrangements therefore depend on policy, but they also depend, to a significant extent, on advocacy, capacity-building and human resource development. Avenues to fund such programmes are however limited and it is always difficult to include significant human resource development component in loan agreements.
The potential role of the World Bank in influencing national policy was also noted. For example, cases of persecution of peasant and other popular leaders should be denounced. At the same time, all efforts should be made to avoid and combat instances of corruption.

Governance issues also relate, as noted elsewhere in this report, to the governance and control of markets. In these issues, the World Bank could and should have a more active role, and should help in setting up and managing global, regional and national regulatory frameworks and instruments.
In this presentation and the ensuing discussions, it was also noted that civil society is not homogenous, and that it incorporates many divergent, and at times conflicting, interests. Too often, the term civil society is used to refer to formally established non-governmental organisations, while the concept also encompasses informal institutions and networks at all levels, including the grassroots.

Reflections on agriculture and rural development strategies
All sessions in this workshop provided the opportunity to formulate general observations and recommendations on rural development strategies, and on the place of agriculture within such strategies. A simple yet fundamental observation made by this workshop is that agriculture must regain its importance in rural development strategies, and that there must be increased attention paid to issues of sustainability, relevance and appropriateness in agriculture-based systems. At the same time, the non-farm dimensions of rural development must be given due consideration in global, national and local strategies.

In its analysis of dominant rural development policies and practices, the workshop observed that:

• while most rural development strategies, including those employed by the World Bank, focus on the need for technological change as a vehicle to increase yields in agriculture, experience has shown that such change does not necessarily benefit the poor;
• at the same time, there is a need for a review of the concept of productivity in agriculture, what it means for whom, and who defines it;
• policy makers in international agencies and in governments have placed too much emphasis on large-scale agricultural production in highly productive areas. Experience shows that small-scale farms can be very productive and that they bring a range of social and economic benefits that are critical to local livelihoods and sustainability;
• in effect, there are three “rural worlds” as defined in the presentation made by Nazneen Kanji, namely: Rural World 1, which is globally competitive, Rural World 2, which has a primarily local orientation, with small and medium-sized landholders (often family-based farms), described as a ‘shrinking/messy middle’, and Rural World 3, with its fragile entitlements, low income and education levels, and high vulnerability to risk and uncertainty. In global and national rural development strategies, there has been too much focus on Rural World 1, which cannot be the model for all rural areas, and not enough emphasis on improving the productivity, competitiveness and sustainability of Rural World 2. Meanwhile, a key challenge is to serve Rural World 3, to target people who do not have access to markets, and to reduce gaps and inequities between these rural worlds;
• rural development strategies should be concerned with food security, but they should also be concerned with issues of food sovereignty: currently, the excessive commercialisation of agriculture and food production takes away the choices of producers;
• the economy is gendered, and rural markets are often biased against women. There is therefore a need for policies and actions that combat these inequities

Rural development strategies and policies therefore need to re-focus on small and marginal farming and production systems, to understand and build on the complexity of resource use and management systems, to respect and enhance the customary relationships that exist between people and natural resources, and to give a legitimate place to both popular and scientific systems of knowledge.

Rural development strategies also need to recognise and help address some of the big issues that impact negatively on rural people and communities, including armed conflicts and other forms of violence, insecurity, migration, and HIV/AIDS. Currently, the World Bank’s new rural development strategy says little about these pressing issues, even though they have a major impact on the livelihoods of vast numbers of rural people, particularly in Africa.

The workshop provided participants with an opportunity to share views on issues related to biotechnology and to the place of genetically modified (GM) organisms in agriculture and rural development. It was agreed that this discussion would not try to reach a consensus, and that the diversity of views and opinions would be respected. It was noted that the World Bank does not have a formal policy on this matter, but that it has initiated a consultative process involving governments, scientists, non-governmental organisations and private companies involved in biotechnology. Among the diverse points made by participants in the workshop were the following:

• there is a need to distinguish between the technology itself and the way it is currently being used and managed;
• apart from biotechnologies, there are a number of other technologies available to improve farm production;
• biotechnology has the potential to contribute to poverty reduction, but only if it is properly managed;
• a main concern is that the production of and property rights over GM seeds are concentrated in the hands of a small number of trans-national corporations;
• another concern relates to the environmental impacts of GM crops, with the spread of seeds and contamination of fields;
• farmers in many developing countries have voiced their opposition to the introduction of GM technology and to their being effectively placed under the control of corporations;
• GM technology comes to farmers as part of a package that typically includes fertilisers and other inputs, making it very costly to sustain production;
• consumers in several parts of the world, and especially in Europe, have made it clear that they want to be able to distinguish between GM and non-GM foods (which will require clear labelling), and reserve the right to reject them;
• since agricultural biotechnology is now a reality, the challenge will be how to regulate it effectively, something that has not been done adequately to date (as recent experiences in countries like the US and Canada with strong regulatory capacity have shown).

In this and other areas, agricultural research needs to be developed and driven by the needs of the poor, and by the objectives of poverty reduction and environmental sustainability.

Strengths and weaknesses of World Bank policies and interventions in rural development
Throughout the various sessions, a number of observations and recommendations were made with respect to the policies and strategies of the World Bank in the field of rural development. The workshop noted the significant reductions in World Bank lending in the rural sector in recent years, and therefore welcomed the Bank’s new commitment to rural development, as reflected in Reaching the Rural Poor, its new rural development strategy. The workshop agreed that there is a need for much greater attention to be paid to rural issues, including agricultural production, and for more public and private sector investment in programmes and interventions that benefit the rural poor.

While the overall directions expressed by the World Bank were welcomed by civil society participants in this workshop, they also noted that current policies and programmes in rural development and poverty reduction are frequently contradicted and undermined by the Bank’s own policies. In many respects, the commitment to the rural poor that is reflected in the policies and programmes of the Bank’s Department of Agriculture and Rural Development is negated by dominant Bank policies and programmes in finance, trade, and private sector development and investment.

The workshop therefore highlighted the need for the World Bank to increase its advocacy role and to broaden its concerns over trade issues, to include issues such as dumping that have very negative impacts on production and food security in poor countries. It was noted that the World Bank’s contribution to international capital flows may be proportionately small, but it remains significant (particularly in the least developed countries), and it can have a major impact on international and national policy (influence and leverage, knowledge, convening and consensus-building role).

With respect to this advocacy role, the workshop recognised the constraints and limitations that the Bank faces. Because of its structure, it responds to the demands of its members and clients, and must accommodate the diversity of their individual policies and positions. At times, this means that the Bank is unable to have a position on its own, as in the case of biotechnology and GM foods.

In all advocacy work, there is also a need for the Bank and for civil society to emphasise the importance of rules-based systems, at both international and national levels, to “stop the bulling” of dominant forces in rich countries. There is also a need for strong advocacy in rich countries, in order to build awareness of the impact of current trade policies and to generate a demand for policy reform.
The workshop observed that the gender dimension is not adequately integrated in development initiatives and interventions, and that it needs to be placed at the centre of World Bank policies and strategies. Through increased civil society involvement, gender issues can be given more attention, both at the level of broad policies and in specific programmes and projects.

In light of the conclusions it reached on the impacts of trade liberalisation and on the requirements for market access by the poor, the workshop noted the need for the Bank to place increased emphasis on the development of the necessary complementary policies, for example on land and on access to credit.

More generally, the workshop noted and welcomed recent and current evolutions in the culture of the World Bank. Participants agreed that the Bank listens more than it did in the past, but many expressed concern over the fact that this process of listening does not always lead to actual change. In this process, the Bank needs to work more with civil society in order to make sure that the voices of the poor are heard.

The workshop noted the negative environmental and social impacts of a number of World Bank initiatives, and participants provided specific examples to illustrate this point. World Bank representatives agreed that such impacts had occurred, and noted that the risks involved in rural development interventions are among the reasons why Bank investments in the rural sector have declined.

With respect to programmes and strategies, lessons from past experience have revealed the dangers and the negative impacts of the “one size fits all” approach that has too often guided World Bank actions and interventions in the past. The workshop therefore emphasised the need to customise approaches to specific needs and conditions, the need to develop local strategies, and the need to respect and build on local knowledge and popular development strategies.

The views and experiences shared in this workshop highlighted the need and the opportunity for a more systematic “scaling-up” of successful rural development interventions, by building on existing pilot and small-scale projects and implementing initiatives that are significantly larger and have broad social and economic impacts. World Bank representatives noted that such scaling-up processes are central to the Bank’s new rural development strategy.

With respect to specific rural development interventions, the workshop also highlighted the need to focus on the most marginalised sectors of rural societies, and especially on groups that have been ignored in past interventions at regional, national and local levels, for examples pastoralist communities in Africa. There is therefore a need for continued exploration of new approaches and strategies to reach the rural poor, and the experiences of civil society organisations can be particularly useful in this respect.

At all stages in these discussions, workshop participants insisted on the need for new, different and more relevant sets of indicators, to identify the poor, to measure change, and to measure participation in policy and programming processes. Without these indicators, the impacts and performance of policies and programmes will remain limited, and rural people will not be able to participate in the monitoring, evaluation and management of the development processes from which they are supposed to benefit.

Research and advocacy requirements, priorities and opportunities
On the basis of these various observations and conclusions, the workshop identified a number of needs and opportunities for further research and advocacy, in order to improve understanding of key issues and to support processes of policy reform. Key themes identified were as follows:

• defensive instruments that protect developing country economies against unfair trade practices;
• standards: what is the real demand? why are they applied? what is their impact on trade and development?
• intermediary mechanisms that allow the rural poor and their organisations to act and intervene in the market;
• accountability mechanisms, not only for governments, but also for trade and the private sector.
  The workshop also noted the need for wider debates and reflections around the themes of governance, community and participation. It noted the need for a self-understanding and definition of civil society, as well as for a better understanding of the concept of community.

Follow-up
Participants agreed that this workshop has provided the opportunity for follow-up action at various levels. It also concluded that the Steering Committee, which assumed responsibility for the design and organisation of the workshop, should retain a facilitating role in the follow-up process.

It was first agreed that there are opportunities for increased collaboration between the Bank and civil society in advocacy on issues of mutual concern, for example on the need to expand investment in rural development and rural poverty reduction, or on the negative impacts of unfair trade practices. Such advocacy is also needed at the national level, where formal and informal collaboration between civil society and the Bank can help promote a pro-poor reform agenda.

In order to build a more solid foundation for this collaboration, civil society representatives asked the Bank to express and confirm its commitment to dialogue, to collaboration with civil society, and to new approaches to rural development. Some of the participants noted that such commitment would require significant shifts in some of the Bank’s positions on key issues. They also asked the Bank to continue to improve access to information by civil society and other groups.

The workshop identified the need for pilot action, collaborative research, evaluation and advocacy on key policy issues (some at global level, some at national level, and some at regional level). A number of themes were identified and suggested, including:

• land reform and policies to improve access to land. World Bank representatives noted that much is already being done on this subject, notably with the Bank’s own research on “Land policies for growth and poverty reduction”. Civil society representatives noted that market-based approaches to land reform are still being promoted in many parts of the world, and that there remains a need for an independent study and evaluation of these policies.
• the place of agriculture and rural development in current PRSPs. Civil society participants and World Bank representatives agreed that a comparative study of PRSPs would be useful, looking in particular at issues of participation, transparency and process.
• impacts of market liberalisation, trade reform and northern protectionism. World Bank representatives indicated that there is on-going work on these issues, and that results should be awaited until new work is initiated. The workshop however concurred on the need to study alternative scenarios that would allow vulnerable countries and economies to cope with unfavourable trade policies. It was also noted that work on these issues should contribute to build awareness and capacity in developing countries.
• causes and consequences of the restructuring of domestic agricultural markets. Mention was made of work done by IIED, RIMISP and research partners on this subject, and it was agreed that there is a need for more research on these issues.
• priority areas of research and technology development. Specific opportunities exist, especially at the national level, for pilot activities aimed at developing a pro-poor agenda for research and technology development.
• participatory monitoring and evaluation and governance. Using a case study approach, there is a need and an opportunity for research on processes and mechanisms available to scale-up successful experiences in this field.

The workshop also agreed that specific activities should be designed and implemented towards enhanced collaboration and coordination among civil society organisations representing rural people, and tripartite dialogue involving states, civil society and the World Bank over issues of rural development and agrarian reform.

The workshop further noted the need for work on new, different and more relevant sets of indicators. It was observed that there are several on-going initiatives, many of them related to the Millennium Development Goals, and that new efforts should link to these and seek to enhance them.

Lastly, participants agreed that there is a need to continue the process of communication and collaboration initiated at this workshop. This process should be centred on an informal, participatory monitoring of the implementation of the Bank’s rural development strategy. This could be done, in part, through the convening of regional and national meetings. It was also agreed that another global meeting should be convened, in a year’s time, at the invitation of civil society, to assess progress made on the basis of the observations, conclusions and recommendations formulated at this workshop.

(1) This report was prepared by Yves Renard, workshop facilitator, on the basis of the notes and records compiled by Baris Karapinar and Kamilah Khatib.
(2) The World Bank’s new rural development strategy Reaching the Rural Poor can be found online at: http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/ESSD/essdext.nsf/PrintFriendly/5D240054ED0CE7DC85256BDE001AF50F?Opendocument.
(3) Until April 2003, this process was facilitated by John Clark, who was at the time a World Bank staff member on leave of absence to the London School of Economics (Center for Civil Society).
(4) Members of this Steering Committee are Manuel Chiriboga of the Asociación Lainoamericana de Organizaciones de Promoción in Ecuador (who was unable to attend the workshop because of other commitments), Nigel Cross and John Thompson of the International Institute for Environment and Development, Rose Mwebaza of Makerere University in Uganda, John Samuel of the National Centre for Advocacy Studies in India, and Salil Shetty of ActionAid. World Bank representatives on the Committee are Ann Duncan, John Garrison, Andrew Rogerson and Rachel Winter-Jones.
(5) Presenters were Sushma Ganguly, Sector Manager (“Rural development priorities and their place in poverty reduction and attaining the Millennium Development Goals”) and Kevin Cleaver, Director, Agriculture and Rural Development (“The World Bank’s Rural Development Strategy”).
(6) Respondents were Salil Shetty of ActionAid and Judi Wakhungu of the African Centre for Technology Studies.

Back to Dialogue page