Environment of Weakening Public Veterinary Service
Implementing EMPRESS (Emergency Prevention System) in an Environment of Weakening Public Veterinary Service Sixth EMPRESS Expert Consultation FAO, Rome, October 2002
1.Introduction:
FAO works in rural areas of developing countries, which are characterized by lack of social cohesion due to some or all of the following conditions: Post-conflict with prevalence culture of violence; Unstable political situation where government has not been able to deliver service effectively; Government in transition with fierce competition for resource; Poor basic infrastructure – transport, education (low literacy), health, communication system; Perpetuated state of emergency – flood, drought, epidemic,..; Poorly functioning market with unsophisticated financial transactions; Plague with mistrust – mistrust within the community, mistrust between the people and the authorities; Fragmentation of community with weak civil society organizations; Weak socio-economic dialogue within the community In situation like this, it is not enough to ask how or in what way can veterinary services effectively deliver. More importantly is the question of how to use the delivery of veterinary service as tool to bring about social cohesion, which is much needed in such community to develop equitably and become self-sufficient. This is what all development workers need to explore if we are to contribute meaningfully to poverty alleviation and to the task of building a liberal democratic nation state, which I believe is the UN's objective.
To build a nation state, one can start from grass-root community. An important ingredients for a liberal democratic community is a culture of flourishing civil society, i.e. clubs, associations, committees, organizations that are built around issues of social, economic, cultural and political nature that affect their livelihood. These could be groupings of religion, profession or saving/credit. For these groupings to work effectively, effective leaders are needed from village to commune to district to province to national levels. This is where community base paraveterinarians can be of service.
2.Privatisation model:
Privatisation model, often time, by-passes the community. In this case, veterinarians are only accountable to individual clients who are their primary customers. This invariably weakens community solidarity at time when it was vital to strengthen community spirit. Privatisation encourages people to focus on self-interest rather than on community interest. Private veterinarians' incentive is profit, and they are accountable only to individual clients.
The trend in the past 25 years has been towards the privatisation of services, which had previously been provided by the state. The general belief was that market could provide better quality services more efficiently. This trend started in developed countries where market situation was in place and more stable political institution together with a more vibrant civil society. In these situations where all these institutions are in place and functioning, privatisation has a better chance to succeed than in areas where FAO usually finds itself working. In short, the imposition of privatisation in such areas (as describe above) push agrarian society to make many shift, such as from interdependence to individualism (profit base) and from a trust base to a contract base society.
If this is the case, how then can any rural development services including animal health services be developed in a way that is not only compatible with community development objective but also actually promote such objective while at the same time providing services at a cost effective and sustainable manner.
3.Integrated community development approach and the role of government:
To build a liberal democratic community, it is important that development workers help to facilitate groupings of people within the community. Committee of community-based paraveterinarians can be one grouping. However, for the community to function well, there need to be other groupings, such as agricultural extension, fishery extension, self-help groups, literacy teachers, health workers, mid-wifery, etc. In other words, to effectively contribute to poverty reduction in these communities, an integrated effort is needed, because the root cause of poverty in these communities is multi-faceted.
These groupings are led by people who are members of the community. They are true representative of the community and have earned the respect of community members through their fairness and compassion in carrying out reliable services. This trust works to overcome market failure and, therefore, reduce the transaction cost of service delivery in rural areas characterized by poorly functioning market. This is because their work helps to organize the market, i.e. the level of the demand and a sufficient, reliable supply of services.
Also important, these groupings within each community needed to be coordinated by a body of leaders such as village development committee or commune development committee. These bodies serve to facilitate discussion of all stakeholders. They work to ensure that community needs are identified adequately, that integrated community development plans emerge from a process of involvement and participation of all stakeholders and, therefore, that resource are distributed equitably.
These co-ordinating bodies together with other empowered groups, such as veterinarian group, agricultural extension group and self-help groups can work to ensure accountability of each other's action and choices. The incentive for all these groupings base on community service, i.e. witnessing that their work is contributing to the development of their community. These service providers are accountable to the community and are motivated, in large part, by public service. NGOs and civil society organisations are usually strong in mobilising community and facilitate groups formation.
This does not mean that public sector has no role. On the contrary, government has a vital role to play in accordance with the comparative advantages vis-à-vis the market, NGOs and other civil society organisations. For example, at the outset, government can help to facilitate in the selection of potential paraveterinarians. Government's biggest task is to provide those selected with technical training. This is followed by monitoring and evaluation of the new paraveterinarians' work. From time to time, government could provide refresher course to updating their skills and follow up to ensure improvement of the quality of services. The government is also responsible in the on-going task of co-ordinating information about diseases and quarantine (regulating movement of animals, etc.). Through these services, the people and the government become more engage in active dialogue which will stimulate demand driven reform (reform that is demanded from the grass-root) and further strengthen social cohesion.
4.Conclusion
Comprehensive and integrated community development has as its primary objective to strengthen solidarity and to rekindle trust. Researchers have recognized trust as one of the most important social institution that facilitates economic exchange by reducing transaction cost. And in poorly functioning market, it is social relationship built on trust, that make the different between the service being provided, or not being provided. It is because of this situation of poorly functioning market that development organizations, including FAO need to invest and be proactive in promoting institution of community solidarity, i.e. the various democratic and transparent groupings as described earlier.
More often than not, it is wrongly assumed by development agencies that when new structure or system is introduced, such as a democratically elected government or other elected decentralised bodies or judicial system or fiscal system or market system, the new structure or system will work without concurrent change in work regime or social fabric. A new structure is not a sure thing for bringing a desirable change. Like any technology, it requires time for the fabric of society to adjust and serious preparation (skills, experiences) to make it works. The government too needs to be prepared. Involving government in community works allows government first hand contact with the people and to learn from the people their needs and aspiration. Thus, one of the most important investments development agencies can make is in this process of bringing the people and the government together more often. This is especially the case in post-conflict societies where government, for a long time in the past, had other things on their agenda. Government and people working together is one of the experience that needs to be re-learnt and needs to be proactively encouraged as part of the preparation for change. Meaningful and momentous dialogue between the people and the government will bring about reform package that is more likely to respond to people's needs, including their need for better quality services, not to mention the contribution it will make to building a liberal democratic community.
Ms. Boua Chanthou
Padek's Director
Phnom Penh, October 2002
