|
|
||||||||||||||||
Drought, famine and war persist in Ethiopia, despite government efforts to combat these. Government attempts to create a policy environment enabling broad economic growth and employment rarely succeeded. Was the Employment Generation Scheme more successful at providing food and income? The Ethiopian government’s Employment Generation Scheme (EGS) was modelled on an approach pioneered in Maharastra, India. The EGS aims to create employment by building sustainable productive assets (such as irrigation infrastructure and rural access roads to help market integration) and provide cash and food for work. This is achieved through labour-intensive public works; normally labour based contracts employing manual and semi-skilled labour. Research from Durham University, UK, examines the EGS implementation process and evaluates successes and failures during Ethiopian crises from 1997 to 2003. The research shows that the EGS did not transform production or stimulate economic growth in rural areas. This was due to:
Furthermore, the government did not implement policies to strengthen land reform and water management. Consequently, and despite huge efforts from central government and the international community, few outputs of EGS remain strong. In the Amhara and Tigray regions, many local officials were unaware of the national EGS policy and the programme mechanisms involved. Due to weak compliance, the policy was seen as voluntary and many officials did not implement central policies. Furthermore, poor communication between federal, regional and local governments increased the differences between the government EGS policy and the reality facing local officials. Many regional officials interviewed did not think it was possible to implement the EGS approach. For example, most NGOs had a strong preference for food-for-work aid - managing this provides funding to cover core costs – and were sceptical about increasing cash-for-work aid. Donors also preferred food-based transfers, even though money to purchase food was the key problem, not local food availability. Other problems included:
There were some successes, such as pilot studies of self-targeting to identify people most in need of support. However, the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the EGS was low. Whilst EGS can compliment other development investments, it cannot remove all the constraints to overcoming food insecurity and poverty. Suggestions for improvements include:
Source(s): Funded by: Self funded id21 Research Highlight: 31 October 2006
Further Information: Contact the contributor: peter@middlebrook-miller.com Other related links:
|
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||