Zimbabwe has endured a decade of political and economic crises that lead to social and humanitarian crises. The country regressed on nearly all social and economic indicators. An estimated 3 million of its 14 million people left the country. More became poor and poverty deepened among the already poor. February 2009 saw the formation of an inclusive government bringing together the main political actors. The new government - a transitional arrangement (not so sure anymore what the transition is to and if it is still on the agenda) - brought about changes that are often cited as having brought about relief for the suffering masses. The main changes were: reduction in political tension and politically motivated violence, improved availability of goods in shops, return of schools and hospitals to functionality, an end to hyper-inflation, and the end of the "casino economy" (a description by the governor of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe of the sometimes rewarding and at times costly speculative gambles that characterised Zimbabwe). I dare not speculate who the casino owner who rigged the equipment to enrich a select few was. Back to the issue at hand. Now Zimbabwe has returned to stability, albeit, a shaky one as the political basis is unstable. Has this 'stability' bode well for the poorest Zimbabweans?
Some points to consider?
In examining the specific benefits for the poorest beyond the general benefits enjoyed by the rest of the population there are some factors that must be taken into consideration. These include the following:
The role of the state in this period of stability has become focused on sustaining itself rather than serving the population (some would argue this is still an improvement on the period immediately preceding the unity government). Resources are so scarce that the government is raising just enough for itself. There is no money for development programmes (no comments please on the moneys being invested in endless planning processes).
The stand-off between the pre-unity government and the international community meant that Zimbabwe was and continues to be excluded from major development programmes and funds that her neighbours enjoy. Instead the focus in Zimbabwe has been humanitarian (keeping body and soul together). This focus has in turn meant that for development sector organisations to survive, they have increasingly taken on humanitarian work.
In the last decade Zimbabwe experienced considerable loss of skills to other countries and preventable/manageable illnesses. Among the effects were loss of capacity of the state and of non-state actors. It however also spanned a new support group. Relatives in the diaspora. The global economic recession has affected this group and changes at home have meant that the remittances they send now fall far short of what could be achieved during the 'casino economy' years.
The capacity of both the state and non-state actors has been severely eroded.
Recovery?
Zimbabwe is currently holding conferences and seminars on economic recovery. Notice how so much of it is about big business. Where do communities fit in? In the 'stable' Zimbabwean economy, those in the country-side are having to batter chickens, goats, cattle, maize, assets for services that are overpriced. Assets are being lost to 'enterprising' traders. Of course it is simple economics at play, but, someone has created this playing field that is steeped in favour of one group. A smaller version of the casino economy maybe?
In all this talk and planning of recovery, what does recovery mean? Is it improving capacity utilisation in industries employing fewer than 10% of the population? Is it recapitalising the loss-making parastatals? Where do the grandmothers looking after orphans who are being robbed blind day and night feature? When will this recovery from the top trickle down to ensure the poor old ladies have some way of earning $4 for a hospital card so they do not need to give away a goat for a hospital card? When will their recovery be discussed and not be left to be buzz words in a few NGOs?
The challenge for Zimbabweans and friends alike
Here are a few questions to get us talking about what needs to happen, what needs to happen and how we can improve planning and practice:
- Given our reality as outlined earlier in the article (poverty, state and non-state actors with limited capacity, scarcity of funds for developmental interventions, and limited skills and own resources) what options are available to Zimbabwe?
- What is being done that is promising?
- What are the prospects for those promising interventions? How will their scaling up and out occur?
- How best can we share information on initiatives that are transforming lives in this difficult environment?
Email is also welcome (send to advisor@ndas-africa.org)
Resource materials recommended/received will be made available at http://www.ndas-africa.org/ on the resources page.
Let the dialogue begin!
0 comments:
Post a Comment