Some reflections on research findings at the Comprehensive Rural

Development Programme sites

Some reflections on research findings at the Comprehensive Rural

Development Programme sites

Economic Performanceand DevelopmentEconomic Performanceand Development

Tim Hart and Peter Jacobs

Parliament SA7 June 2013

Tim Hart and Peter Jacobs

Parliament SA7 June 2013

IntroductionIntroduction• 2010-2011 HSRC contracted by DRDLR to audit technologies used

in 8 CRDP sites (Vryheid excluded)• 20 wards to be extended to 160 by 2014

Social science that makes a difference

DefinitionsDefinitions

• Technology: “…any tool or technique, product or process, physical equipment or method of doing or making, by which human capability is extended”, (Wallender 1979)

• Product technologies – higher productivity or improved quality

• Process technologies – create new or improved products• Transaction technologies - facilitate co-ordination,

information sharing and market exchange

• Innovation (novel, value, diffused) – activity of invention, adoption, diffusion and adaption of products, processes, marketing strategies and organisational arrangements

MethodologyMethodology

• A scoping study was undertaken - involved a desktopcomponent, a qualitative fieldwork component and an analysis component.

• Due to time frame this was a participatory rapid assessment to determine current picture within historical context and local experience.

• To identify technologies - focus on identifying projects / initiatives that make use of some form of technology

Social science that makes a difference

Profile of TechnologiesProfile of Technologies• In 8 Pilot sites activities using some form of technology

include 113 examples:• 64 projects receiving government and non-

government support – ‘modern’ technologies• 39 initiated prior to onset of CRDP mid-2009

• 27 local initiatives using ‘modern’ technologies but with no external support

• 22 examples of ‘indigenous’ knowledge• Many technologies common across sites –

mechanisation, VIP latrines, hybrid seed home gardens, brick and block making, various ICTs products or support services

TechnologiesTechnologies

Recommendations Following FindingsRecommendations Following Findings• Effectively use social facilitation processes –

participation is an action and process – not simply a means to achieve consensus

• Commercially oriented projects must consider existing conditions and challenges – historical and current – as well as experiences.

• Build institutional technical and non-technical capacity of project participants and strengthen their relationship with broader economy – integration

Social science that makes a difference

Recommendations Following FindingsRecommendations Following Findings• Encourage and support entrepreneurs – the ignored ‘27’

• Consider alternative project models that might be more suited- Poverty projects cannot suddenly become commercial - invest in identifying models, organisationalarrangements and support.

• Pilots sites for learning? Establish M&E system that allows for challenges to be identified and addressed so as to ensure interventions have desired impacts –numbers say little when quality, lessons and expectations are excluded

Social science that makes a difference

CRDP Between 2010 and 2012CRDP Between 2010 and 2012

• Access to progress of CRDP is restricted• By end 2012 – 92 wards reached out of proposed 160

(58%)• But actual service delivery unclear• Predominantly identification of wards, discussions with traditional

leaders and councillors, WoP household profiling• Only 60 of 92 have been profiled (+90 LR farms)• Only 25 status quo reports ‘more or less’ completed - out of

original 29 wards – nothing on the remaining 63• Decisions taken by Council of Stakeholders – elitist

• Participation, iterative learning, social cohesion, vibrancy? - are these being achieved

Food Security and Capacity BuildingFood Security and Capacity Building• By 2014: expect 67 929 food gardens and agri-food parks

across 160 wards = 60% of households• By 2011: only 1346 food gardens (2% of target) and 2 agri-

food parks (5%)

• By 2011: only 472 rural residents including land reform beneficiaries part of skills development programmes - out of the potential millions living in these areas

• By 2011: 9 949 ward residents employed through EPWP and CRDP projects

• By 2011: NARYSEC youth training target between 7401-7958 but what has been achieved

Policy ConsiderationsPolicy Considerations• How much support is given to new ideas since CRDP initiated

and how much is support to pre-existing and often floundering projects?

• How much thought is going into conceptualisation in terms of sustainable rural development – bigger picture?

• Development process more important than actual technologies available and introduced – there are no universal solutions.

• Are we building on what people know or simply replacing?• There is space for integrating IKS and modern technology -

requires acknowledgement, tolerance and willingness to learn• What lessons can we learn from local initiatives?• How do projects link into the broader rural and national

economy?

ConclusionConclusion

• So much research exists, so much more is being conducted but what is happening to the results and outputs of this research?

• What pause for reflection on the CRDP has occurred• M&E must be participatory and continuous if

fundamental principles of CRDP are to be followed –once-off bi-annual assessments are useless exercises

• Ships turn slowly so change in direction must be gradual and timely.

Graph slideGraph slide