Community-Based Projects and Micro-Credit Programs

MOWA was not the only ministry under pressure to implement GAD policies. In the mid 1990s the Royal Government of Cambodia in cooperation with UNICEF (1995- 96a) released a new plan for the years 1996-2000, aimed at increasing people’s access to

coordinated community-based systems and improving the situation of women and children through addressing the underlying dissonance within the society. Their goal was to enhance the capacity of communities focussing on the education, health and welfare of women and youth, through the implementation of multi-sectored programs. This was to be supported by national, provincial, district and commune structures. Participating ministries were to be MOWA for Community Action for Social Development, MOEYS for education programs including literacy for women, and MOH for health including nutrition, hygiene, and child care training for all those involved in child-care. Also, due to constraints on the development of village-based economic activities caused by lack of technology, technical and entrepreneurial skills, as well as infrastructure limitations including the lack of low cost transportation, market opportunities and marketing systems, MOWA also focussed on credit programs to improve employment and income. As a result of these initiatives, by the late 1990s some community-based development projects were seen to be moving in a more positive direction to reach those who had previously lacked access to development, particularly women and children.

Due to the high interest rates of money-lenders and extreme difficulties finding capital to set up small farms and businesses, micro-credit programs were being used to promote economic growth and stability. The typical pattern followed by these programs was to link an international NGO such as OXFAM, CARE or PACT with a local NGO to provide credit services at the community level. The international NGO serves as a source for funding and technical support, while the local NGO delivered the actual services. Rasmussen (2001:33-35) outlines the basic Cambodian models for micro-credit borrowing as being through the implementation of ‘solidarity groups’. The Grameen model is one of the most rigid forms of micro-credit, where members are of ‘like mind and similar economic level’, taking vows to support each other and ensure that loans will be repaid. Grameen Bank (2001) states that the basic philosophy of the group model is that “shortcomings and weaknesses at the individual level are overcome by the collective responsibility and security afforded by the formation of a group of such individuals”. These programs also include rice banks and a range of cow and livestock banks. Often, NGOs implementing these programs use group meetings as an opportunity to provide literacy training, health and nutrition education, and basic business training. Rasmussen (2001:36) found that the moral support of the group was especially important for

Cambodian women who were resisting pressure, such as from a husband wishing to take the loan for his personal use.

However, although micro-credit programs were extremely useful in helping alleviate poverty in some villages, the poorest of the poor did not benefit as they had nothing to offer as collateral. Rasmussen (2001:178) revealed a range of problems related to abuse of power by group leaders, late payments of loans and over-capitalizing on farm development projects where people were forced to sell their animals and land in order to repay their debts. As a result, some reported that their quality of life had worsened after joining a micro-credit program (p. 192-3). Added to this, with a majority of males in the programs, poor women were often found to be missing out on getting much-needed loans because they were uncomfortable speaking out in a group (p.178). They complained that credit leaders “only lend to their friends and family”, and wealthy people in charge of programs (seen as a ‘patrons’) were clearly biased to supporting the local middle-class women. Agency staff members were loath to encourage their more wealthy leaders to include the poor in programs.

Meas Nee and O’Leary (2001) found that cultural constraints resulting in poor levels of village-based community development were largely due to the lack of willingness of NGO practitioners to listen to the people and understand their needs. They maintained that development is about people being empowered to bring about positive change in their own lives, and about personal growth together with public action to challenge poverty, oppression and discrimination. They described numerous instances of practice that have changed people’s lives for the better, and believe that their approach amounts to an alternative view to development that questions many of the common assumptions and practices of the prevailing theories of development. To bring about sustainable development, practitioners need to let go of their own traditional behaviours related to believing they are benefactors of the needy, and gain the trust of those they wish to empower. Practitioners must learn to listen to people’s stories and slowly build up confidence and mutual trust before being able to work together to find solutions to development problems.