NG WHO?

—THE NGO COMMUNITY AS A STIMULUS FOR

CHANGE
“The BLUE Pill, A Viagra in Community Development”
by Myrtle Palacio
Article in The Amandala—June 1998

KOHM EEN DA MEE AHM

COMM-U-WHO?! COMM-U-WHO?! The sound reverberates particularly to the south and in the
alley ways of the main urban center, Belize City. This is indicative of a “decline in” or a “loss of”
community. It connotes poverty of opportunity, chronic inadequacy, economic dependence, and
political impotence of communities that were once vibrant. Whatever the reasons for this “loss”,
and there are many, it is indicative of the reduction in the quality of life of a community. This is
criminal and needs to be arrested

Development is multi-faceted. Development is a partnership. The NGO as I argued last week is a

necessary partnership in the development of our communities. Its is as important a political
institution in governance as the Public Service. The past decade saw millions of dollars from
bilateral and multinational aid agencies to the NGO’s. According to statistics from Central Bank,
funds attracted by NGO’s to Belize amounted to $42.3 million between 1995 and 1997,
representing an average of $14.1 M annually. This figure demonstrates only what is accessible
directly through commercial banks. Yet despite the debate and substantial investment in human
development, the above realities of “loss” remain very much prevalent in our communities.

The literature offers some reasons for such realities. 1. The model of sustainability is far too
narrow and offers very little thought to the social, political and institutional sustainability; 2.
Assistance is invariably distorted and driven by political priorities of governments and donors, and
not the needs of recipients; 3. The model failed to incorporate citizen participation in the
management and structuring of their development; 4. Professional “developers” assumption that
they influence more than they really do.

All of the above can easily, be transferred to the Belize experience. At the same time, due to
efforts in intervention abovementioned, these communities are no longer isolated or traditional, but
are more educated and better connected with the outside world. Schools are everywhere and the
boob tube brings the world into our homes. These communities are what is left over after
development has happened. They are a new kind of economy, and hence the social problems
they face is more deeply ingrained.

INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE—A PRIORITY

The challenge then is to be introspective, to look at ourselves, the professional “developers”, and
the institutions we serve or have created. The root of the problem may be dysfunctional
institutional. Under many circumstances, change agents do indeed serve a need in reducing and
relieving social ills in our communities. You see, we almost never question the inadequacies,
defects, or failures of our institutions.

Less attention and thought is given to the more disarming question of evaluating the HOW in which
institutions and agents alleviate problems. But review is important as the HOW at times
exacerbates instead of ameliorate the problem.

I will attempt to examine three anomalous situations in which institutional activity exacerbates
rather than relieves problems. Firstly, professional “developers” are outsiders to the communities
they serve. Their perceptions and solutions are invariably clouded by their own values and world-
view, and may not be the same as those of community members. In their zeal for results, and with
pressure from funding agencies that seek efficiency and predictability, activities become uniform
and not related to a particular community’s special needs. Communities then interpret this as
institutional indifference.

Secondly, there is a failure to deliver the resources necessary to complete the cycle of change.
This is mainly due to the failure to provide an integrated package of programs. Instead services
are duplicated, disjointed and fragmented, with each organization doing the best with what it has--
At times even competing with each other at duplicating the same services. Fragmented
programmes expand aspiration and hope, but provide little structured opportunity for sustainability
to realize the hope. The failure to deliver invariably leads to apathy, retreat, and anancyism.

Lastly, the value for education is a Belizean cultural trait. All Std. 6 students sit the BNSE, a
procedure used for the selection of students into secondary schools. However, not all the schools
are on the same level playing field. Some of the schools in the south are a classic example of poor
service. The reasons are: lack of text books, timeliness of acquiring information, less school days
due to absentee teachers, poor infrastructure, and so on. Therefore, some schools are better
served than others. Although these are primarily administrative, yet it is a community consideration
in this partnership for development. But the end all is that BNSE also serves as an instrument of
social discrimination, because the grade defines the student and hence her life chances.

To improve the quality of life in our communities, we need to deal with the “decline in “ or “loss of”
community. As the resources come in, whether in cash or in kind, let us put a little viagra into
community development activities through institutional review and reassessment.
2