SOCIALLY JUST DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE

The BDP phase two (2006-2010) has included consultations with various stakeholders such as civil society organizations, the private sector, donor agencies, policy research institutions, universities, research and advocacy networks and the media.

The regional consultation in 2008, for instance, included a diverse set of stakeholders. (Badenoch, 2002;

MRC, 2003a; 2005e; MRCS, 2003a-c; Mehtonen et al., 2008)

!

!

6.3 SOCIALLY JUST DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE

There are multiple regional organizations working in the Mekong Region. These institutions, however, have their own narrow agendas and priorities (Sokhem and Sunada, 2006). The varying interests within and between the organizations as well as the countries have undermined the motivation for cooperation and the mutual gains seem to be limited (Ratner, 2003). Hence, there is currently no institution that has capabilities or willingness to holistically analyze and manage the region’s challenges and to engage related stakeholders.

The region will experience a rapid development in the next years with long-lasting and extensive impacts on its economy and people. The need for a regional institution with a broad perspective including all the diverse aspects of sustainability is accordingly enormous. This institution should, besides the economic, social and environmental development, have a deep understanding of human-ecology dynamics, cause-effect relationships, local conditions and the different perspectives of the region’s countries (Badenoch, 2002). The MRC addresses socially just development and poverty reduction in the Mekong Basin. What are the capabilities of the commission to improve regional cooperation and to enhance social sustainability?

In recent years, the commission has become sidelined from regional decision-making and the organization has had problems in finding its position

this growth has increased inequality in the region, these doubts may be justified.

The commission recognizes the hydropower potential and construction as fundamental components of the member countries’ policies to enhance economic growth and eliminate poverty (Bird, 2008). This is a controversial statement given the aim of achieving poverty reduction, since these plans may have negative effects particularly on the poorest residents of the region. Together with the fact that presently many of the decisions on hydropower development have been taken behind closed doors and without meaningful public consultation, this announcement is doubtful (Middleton, 2008). The positive sign, on the other hand, is that since the hydropower development is increasing in the region, the MRC will support the dialogues related to the development through the IWRM process and stakeholder participation, such as in the hydropower meeting in September 2008. There is, however, a great danger that the local people are not represented well enough in these consultations, even if there is a plethora of stakeholders present.

The participation approach has been declared important for the work of MRC already for many years, but an evident mismatch has existed between the approach on paper and the contribution of civil society in reality. In the present organization structure the input of civil society is taken up by the National Committees. The local communities are, however, very far from the NMCs and the grass root development proposals have not been heard. In addition, the member countries also differ in terms of public empowerment, which has an influence on the volume of the public voice. In the new strategic plan, the commission will nonetheless increase education and awareness-raising to foster stakeholder participation in line with its IWRM strategy and support the roles of the NMCs (MRC, 2006).

Even though lately a large number of new participatory approaches have been implemented through the programs of MRC, there still is a great danger that the low stakeholder participation in the regional co-operation scene. There have also

been problems within the organization in getting support for the social aspects. As a consequence, the programs of the commission have not for many years included real participatory approaches or social analyses, although these actions have been proposed. Today MRC is exploring a new direction for its work by identifying the aspects that are needed to fulfil its strategic goals and find its role among the regional actors.

MRC lays out great expectations for the adopted IWRM process. Enhancing this process may be something that is needed in the region; an institution that makes regional cooperation, stakeholder dialogue and empowerment of civil society achievable. Bringing the regional actors with their own participatory approaches and local level contacts together also supports the overall local knowledge in regional decision-making. The new direction of MRC also shows signs that the competition between different agendas within the organization is over, and that there is a common willingness to adopt socially just development.

The new strategic plan is not, however, the whole truth and a great deal of changes need to happen in the future. The MRC needs to greatly change its development-focused working patterns and attitudes to be able to fulfil the new organizational goals, get tangible results and have a real impact on the lives of the people. In addition, the question arises whether the commission presently is in a position, to implement an effective IWRM process in the region or is the wave already gone with stakeholder dialogue opportunities (Hirsch et al., 2006).

The work of MRC has been accused of too narrow focus on sustainability, whereas the economic development has been high on the agenda.

Consequently, doubts have been raised about the new agenda, particularly among the NGOs (Woods, 2003). Many have claimed that in reality this statement hides an even more development-focused trend than the previous agendas (Robertson, 2006). Given that the commission aims to achieve poverty reduction through a continuation of the present economic growth, admitting, however, that

especially in the early implementation phases of the programs, has put the long-term programs such as the Irrigation, Agriculture and Forestry Program and the Fisheries Program on weak soil. In view of the fact that these programs have started without public participation, the question arises whether the later-added participatory approaches can reshape the programs to address the local concerns and thus achieve comprehensive poverty alleviation.

MRC has a large number of programs, many of which are trying to involve the public and increase civil society input. This flood of different activities might confuse the local people and undermine their trust in the possibilities to make their opinions heard and recognized in the policy development.

There is also a great danger that the programs mentioned in the new strategic plan are still too diverse and narrow in scope, hence destroying the ground of the commission to achieve its targets for sustainable and integrated development.

Much of the future development depends on the Basin Development Plan and its achievements in the IWRM process and participatory development.

In order to succeed in participatory development, there remains a variety of open questions to be answered in the approach of the commission:

BDP aims to increase public participation in civil society organizations. In reality the voices of the region’s civil society are low and thus the local people are often represented by NGOs and academics. As a result, this hand on information does not always meet the grass root opinions of poor local farmers, fishermen and traders. Thus, how will the MRC support the civil society organizations of the region and be able to hear the opinions of the poor?

It is stated that the water user group networks and community fisheries do not empower the poor people in the communities that generally lack control over the common pool resources such as water and fish (Middleton and Tola, 2008). Consequently, can these organizations represent the views of the local people in such a way that equal poverty reduction is achieved?

•

•

How do the participatory processes of the commission utilize the present forms of decentralization such as commune councils and development committees that are set up to support the local level input as well as the other already existing local arrangements?

Since it is commonly known that capacity building is needed in the region especially among the ministries, NMCs and civil society, the Integrated Capacity Building Program of MRC is highly important for the region’s development. How this program can influence the sector programs of MRC and reshape their goals to support the real challenges of the basin and support the grass root organizations is yet to be seen.

•

•