POST WAR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT:
the case for an Acholi Regional Development Authority

James B. OKEE - OBONG

Dr. J.B. Okee Obong is a consultant on health, population dynamics, rural development planning, and natural resource management. He is currently at the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Sociology of Health and Medicine, University of Vienna – Austria. Can be reached at jamesb_okeobo@yahoo.com

Introduction

The prime test of a development program is its implementation. Unfortunately, many programs in developing countries do not reach this stage, and even if they did, implementation is enforced from the centre, ignoring the potentials in the region. Consequently, financial resources and spin-off benefits that should have accrued to the regional economy are with held or repatriated to the centre, thus compromising quality, and there is lack of accountability. The problem originates from the organisational structure of government institutions that are usually in no way designed for development, and are particularly inadequate for regional planning and development. Putting the idea of regional planning as a cross-function to use depends mainly on the quality and character of the organisation responsible for development. This organisation should meet, under all circumstances, the four basic requirements for a successful development program. These are: co-ordination of national planning with local planning in all sectors of the economy. Two, continuous co-ordination of the various economic and service functions within the development region. Three, an active and continuous interrelation between planning and implementation, ensuring transfer of resources from one project to another as changes occur during implementation. Finally, active participation of the beneficiaries to enable mobilisation of local resources (public and private) - without which no self-sustained momentum can be achieved.

In a critical discussion of the current government approach vis-à-vis the strengths of an autonomous development authority, this paper advocates for an empowered autonomous development organisation for the Acholi Region (AR). Points are illustrated with examples drawn from Government’s Northern Uganda Reconstruction Programme (NURP); the Italian Cassa per 11 Mezzeorto; French Permanent lnter-ministerial Committee for Regional - Territorial Planning and Development; Netherlands Polders Authority; and the Israeli Settlement Department. It is my hope that issues raised in this paper will stimulate further discussion and eventually lead to the establishment of an Acholi Development Authority that will effectively tackle post war reconstruction and later development. I believe this approach shall enable Acholi Region to recuperate socio-economically from the devastating impacts of the war, and hence bridge the ever widening north - south socio-economic divide in Uganda.

Government Organisation and Development Needs

Many countries have come to realise that to achieve their development aims some co-ordination between the different government agencies ought to be established. It has often been accomplished through some kind of a central planning authority. A good example in Uganda is NURP. Though it was developed from "below" by the District Development Committees, its implementation was from the "top" in the capital Kampala. Such organisations usually act solely at the national level and have no powers of implementation. It is common procedure for matters of significance that require inter-agency consideration to be negotiated and resolved in high-level committees of ministers or top-administrative officials or even in cabinet sessions. Since the organisational structures of government agencies are strictly vertical, even matters of regional or local importance that require inter-agency negotiations are often referred to administrative bodies in the capital. Suggestions and ideas originating in some office in the field have to climb the ladder within one ministry until they reach the top, and only then if at all is it possible, can they be evaluated and co-ordinated with other ministries. Under such a bureaucratic system, chances of fulfilling the basic requirements for a successful development program are practically impossible. This type of problem has also dogged NURP. What are the reasons for government agency inadequacies? They are basically two: First, officials directly involved in a regional project often lack sufficient authority to make decisions, while those who have that authority sit in the capital city. Frequently the offices in the field serve only as a source of information and for passing on of instructions; no decisions are made there. Since the capital is remote from the development region both in distance and in contact with local problems, the decisions reached are often unrealistic or irrelevant to the problem involved. Things usually look different on the spot than they do from afar. Furthermore, the inability to make decisions prevents the local officials from co-ordinating their activities. Even mutual consultation is often hampered because the different government offices in the region are located in different places and sometimes even in different towns. Thus, it happens that while regional development requires co-ordination of all the economic and social activities in the region, the people responsible for the various aspects are unable to work together. Second, different government ministries/agencies assign different priorities to different projects. Each determines its own scale of priorities and distributes its budgets and manpower among the development operations accordingly. As a result, the various components of a certain regional project are often given different priorities by each agency involved, thus making it almost impossible to carry out the undertaking as planned. NURP was developed upon several government ministries and NGOs, and each ministry and NGO gave the project a different priority in accordance with its own considerations. For example, priority focused on building infra-structure and to a less extent household income generating activities. This was because, in their opinion, roads and schools were more critical. The result was low participation by the local people. Consequently, in many places local communities did not make significant contributions to the required local raw materials, that is if they did, and in some cases coercion was used. Several years have now passed: some roads have done, but not maintained; some schools built, others remain gapping uncompleted structures, or just foundations. Above all, there is no improvement in the household economy of the rural people. Instead as different household economic surveys have shown, the people have become poorer, inspite of the Poverty Alleviation Program component.

Physical Planning and the Support System

The snags resulting from uncoordinated activity in the different sectors in NURP are very conspicuous in the sphere of physical planning. Only the major urban towns of the program districts were planned. In this way, the support system - external assistance to the farm to increase production – which includes farm services such as supply, marketing, credit facilities and instructions; public services such as education and health; and physical infra-structure including roads, warehouses, etc; was denied the opportunity to develop and provide the much needed development services. Consequently, people have still to travel long distances to the main urban towns to obtain the much needed supplies. Similarly, the technocrats have to make long journeys to "visit" their areas of supervision. The efficiency of the support system depends upon appropriate physical planning of service centres and installations dispersed throughout the rural areas. This is almost impossible to implement within the conventional pattern of organisation, because every government agency plans its regional activities separately. The ministry of education plans educational services, the ministry of rehabilitation, welfare services, the ministry of health, health services, and the ministry of agriculture, agricultural services. As a result, in many cases there is no interrelationship or co-ordination between the various service facilities established in the rural districts. What chance is there, under such an organisational structure of co-ordinating many faceted programs, especially those based on fundamental changes in the nature of institutions?

Regional Development Board or Authority

To overcome the difficulties that arise from the conflict between the needs of development and the usual organisational structure of government administration, government should seek for other patterns of development organisation. The usual solution has been the establishment of special authorities for development, but a Board could do as well. The unique feature of such authorities, as compared with other government agencies, is that their scope of activity is not vertical by function or sector, but horizontal by region. Within their region of responsibility, they have broad authority to deal with activities involving various sectors according to the requirements of the plan. Each national authority's activities ought to be based on regional divisions. The status and power of a development authority vary from country to country and change according to particular local conditions. Generally, the established authorities fall in one of the two main categories: authorities responsible for planning and co-ordination of implementation; or authorities that are themselves entrusted with the responsibility for implementation.

Justification for an Acholi Development Authority (ADA)/Board (ADB)

Since Acholi has suffered devastating impacts of war and displacement for long, it requires a development authority or board that will be responsible for planning, co-ordinating and implementing its development programs. Responsibilities for implementation that would normally be in the hands of regular government agencies ought to be placed directly under the authority. Because such agencies are not yet or are only partially active in the area. In such a circumstance, it is possible to "expropriate" an entire development area. Taking it out of the hands of the various government offices and handing it over to the exclusive care and responsibility of an authority organised for this purpose. Such an "expropriation" should be only temporary. After an intensive development period, emphasis should shift back to normal administration of current service activities. There is then no longer any need for an authority with special implementation powers. Based on experiences with development authorities in various resettlement programs, it appears that the duration of an authority’s responsibility for implementation depends on a number of factors: some technical (land clearance and reclamation, establishment of an infrastructure, erection of vital installations); some organisational (mobilisation of suitable work-force, allocation of financial resources); some economic (the structure of the economy and its state of development, the nature of the support system, the planned scale of industrial activity, and the pace at which industrial enterprises are set up); and others social. Social factors, however, seem to have the greatest influence on the length of the transition period. Particularly important are the readiness and ability of the people being resettled to undertake responsibility (either directly or through their representatives on the local government bodies, agricultural unions, or political organisations) for organising production and service activities. They should begin within the community and later spread throughout the whole region. In any event, after a transition period of implementation and close supervision, administration of the new regions become similar to the rest of the other areas of the country. "Expropriation" in settled areas are difficult to effect because of pressure from active agencies. This is because branches of the central and local governments and public and private institutions do not fore go the right to participation in regional development. Acholi could take advantage of the current displacement in "Protected Villages" to set up an ADA. This is because its organisational structure will to a considerable extent reflect a compromise between different opposing forces: between the need for an independent authority capable of dealing on its own with all the aspects of development planning, implementation and follow-ups and the need to find a modus vivendi with existing bodies; a compromise between the need for horizontal inter-sectoral co-ordination of development activities at the regional level and the vertical administration of specialised sectoral functions.

Structure and Operation of the Proposed Authority or Board

The proposed authority should have a carefully planned structure and operation. For the purpose of development, Acholi could be divided into a number of planning units, with a project co-ordinator appointed for each unit. The divisions ought to be based on agreed criteria. The unit co-ordinator shall come under the direct authority of the Regional co-ordinator (RC) who is directly responsible to the Minister for NURP. The RC will be responsible for preparing a plan based on the directives of the central planning commission (CPC). S/He will use that section of the national plan (NP) that concerns his region, and its implementation. S/He shall co-ordinate the activities of all government agencies within the region. The RC will be assisted by two public bodies: one, a committee of representatives of government departments, the co-ordinating body at the regional level (the Regional Administrative Conference - RAC). The other, an advisory agency, the Inter - Regional Commission for Reconstruction and Development (IRCR&D), composed of representatives of the population in the region and experts of different professions nominated by the minister for NURP. This organisational system guarantees co-ordination between objectives specified at the national level and detailed programs that arise out of regional needs and potentialities. Long-term plans will be formulated by a committee of Chairperson of the various sub-committees, of the respective District Local Councils. They will work under the chairmanship of the Minister for NURP. The plans must be approved by the Acholi Inter-regional Commission for Reconstruction and Development (AIRCR&D), which would be the supreme co-ordinating body of the Regional Plan. The projects supported by the proposed Authority shall originate in proposals submitted by various agencies and enterprises operating in the areas under its jurisdiction. The Authority shall encourage and support those projects that fit into its long-term plans. The Authority shall also participate in the process of awarding major contracts. In this manner it will be able to co-ordinate local initiative with national objectives, and ensure that local potentials and resources are used. It is important that the organisational structure of the proposed Authority should meet the requirements of both vertical and horizontal functions of regional planning. On the one hand, it should act as a link co-ordinating national with local planning; and on the other it should be responsible for co-ordination between sectors within the region.

The Authority shall be independent and its activities separate from the routine duties of the government offices and public agencies operating within its area of jurisdiction. The authority will not be obliged to cope with implementation, since the local bodies – public and private – are capable of executing projects that it authorises, and require only financial assistance and sometimes professional guidance. Should it be obliged to engage in implementation, then its areas of activity could include: water supply and drainage, land reclamation and transformation (from forests and Tse tse flies), industry, road and railway construction, airports, tourism, hospitals, schools and vocational training, credit and Finance. In the best interest of efficiency, transparency, and sustained community participation, projects authorised and financed by the Authority should be implemented by local agencies involved in development work in the region. It is only when these organisations are incapable of carrying out the projects, is the Authority with the agreement of the appropriate minister or the appropriate local authority, able to undertake implementation as well or contract agencies from outside the region. By law, the Authority or the foreign firm shall be obliged to transfer to those agencies that would normally be responsible for operating them all enterprises and installations established by it. This ought to be done within six months from date of completion, unless these agencies are incapable of undertaking such responsibility. In that case some other arrangement, approved by the authorities ought to be made.

Another important component of the agreement should be training of local technocrats/ians while they are still implementing the project. These would be the people to take over the management of the project when the time arrives. Government should also assist in the establishment of regional development companies to help build and support local entrepreneuralship. These companies should be "mixed-economy" companies, since both public and private bodies must participate in them. They should be registered like any other commercial company, but not profit-oriented; and at least 50 percent of the company shares must be publicly owned, and their management should be in the hands of a board of directors chosen at a public meeting of all shareholders. One representative of the state (preferably a technocrat) must have a seat on the board of directors, and s/he shall have the right of veto over any decisions of the management. Public bodies participating in these companies should include the central government ministries, local government agencies, and other public institutions operating in the region. In doing this, government should avoid involving politicians and government bureaucrats to minimise conflicts of interest. To be effective, ADA must establish a research and development study centre that will carry out research on rural development problems (base studies, designing intervention projects, monitoring and evaluating). Without this component, the development authority will remain a limping duck.

Some examples of Development Authorities in Developed Countries

Inspiration to establish an Acholi Development Authority can be drawn from experiences with successful development authorities in the developed countries. These authorities were established only to plan and co-ordinate development programs for backward areas within their countries. The main difficulty met by these authorities was not in implementation, for which government departments with professional specialists are responsible, but in co-ordination and direction of the activities of these departments. An example of such an authority is the Cassa per 11 Mezzeorto, the Fund for the Development of the South. It was established in Italy after World War II to reduce the gap between the developed North and backward South. Before 1950 development activities in the southern regions were sporadic and ineffective. A special authority, responsible for directing development projects of all public bodies operating in the South was established. The Cassa was empowered to prepare long-term development plans; and provided with a budget for co-ordination of the implementation of the plans. The law provided that this budget must constitute at least 40 percent of the total national development budget. France has one of the most highly developed organisational structure for meeting the requirements of regional planning in settled areas. The regionalization of development planning and implementation began in France in 1960, when a Permanent lnter-ministerial Committee for Regional and Territorial Planning and Development was established. Within the framework of the program for regional development - boosting household incomes and the regional economy, the French government assisted in establishing regional development companies. There are currently six "Mixed economy" companies operating in France; the oldest and largest of them is found in the Region of Bas-Rhone Languedoc. The development authority and the "Mixed companies" have had tremendous impact on the development of the region. The Italian and French examples demonstrate the application of regional planning and co-ordination in areas that are already settled. Where development needs further momentum, particularly in new or resettlement areas, the need is more comprehensive. An example of an Authority in a developed country, from which we can draw many lessons, is the Polders Authority in the Netherlands responsible for both planning and implementation. The Authority is responsible for planning and implementing settlement in areas reclaimed from the sea. After the Polder has been dried, the authority constructs all public works in the area; build all the settlements, including the network of services; chooses the settlers; determines the structure of the farm economy; and supplies agricultural extension services during the period of development. Afterwards it transfers its various activities to the usual government and municipal bodies. Another example of a successful planning and implementation development authority is the Settlement Department in Israel. Because of Israel’s small size, it was established as a national organisation, operating through a net work of regional offices. Consequently, it is responsible for a number of regions throughout the country. It is an arm of the Jewish Agency, established to further agricultural settlement in Palestine. In 1952, after Israel became independent, an agreement was signed between the Jewish Agency and the government of Israel; providing that the Settlement Department would handle all operations connected with the development of new rural settlements, until they had been placed on a secure basis, economically, socially and organisationally. The Settlement Department operates independently in all areas connected with discharging this responsibility. For example, allocation of land; construction of local irrigation networks; economic and architectural planning of new settlements; supply of equipment and means of production; managing the affairs of multipurpose co-operatives that handle credit, marketing, and other farm and village affairs; developing the supporting system; and planning of rural centres. It is also responsible for the provision of technical services performed by special departments that handle such matters as irrigation, planting of orchards, rural industries, population and social relations, statistics, contracts and securities, and finance. It initiated the establishment of the Settlement Study Centre, which is concerned with research into rural development problems. Based on its findings, detailed planning and implementation are then carried out in the regional offices, according to the policies and principles laid down by the central executive. The main tasks of the central executive are to determine development policy, allocate the budget, and supervise implementation. The regional director has considerable authority to make decisions, limited only by the general framework of the plan as authorised by the central executive.

Conclusion

I would like to conclude by observing that, in view of the formidable challenges of post war reconstruction and development, the inadequacies of government agencies or ministries; and the immense advantages of an independent development authority specifically assigned with the task of planning and implementing development programs, Acholi should set up one such authority or board. With a development authority in place, regional planning as a cross-function shall successfully be effected, and Acholi should be able to effectively tackle post war reconstruction and later development. I reiterate my believe in this approach to enable Acholi Region recover socio-economically from the devastating impacts of political turmoil and war, and rapidly bridge the wide north - south socio-economic divide.