Taking action on poverty

Taking action on poverty

It is obviously too early to assess the implementation of the special
poverty alleviation program which was launched last April under the
Presidential Aid Program for Poor Villages throughout Indonesia. As
usual, it is only to be expected that some technical problems may crop
up at the start up of new projects.

Even so, recent mass media reports on the implementation of the
program deserve attention, especially because some of the issues seem
related to the basic principles of the program itself.

Although the National Development Planning Board (Bappenas), as the
national coordinator and supervisor of the program, has yet to verify
the truth of the newspaper stories, notably those regarding the alleged
misuse of funds, we are nonetheless encouraged by the keen media
attention. Such an intense public scrutiny will help detect any problems
early on.

Unlike other Presidential Aid programs for regional and rural
development, which are implemented directly by the central government
and which are designed to develop public services and infrastructure,
the latest initiative is based wholly on grassroots or bottom-up
planning and the funds are allocated directly for the benefit of poor
people. Over the next three years, the target population will decide how
the Rp 20 million (US$9,200), allocated annually for each of the more
than 20,630 villages identified as pockets of poverty, will be used.
Hence, the government acts only as the supervisor and facilitator.

The latest poverty alleviation program is aimed at the estimated 26
million people, or 14 percent of the total population, who still live
below the poverty line. These poor people, who were identified through a
national survey last year, remain untouched by the various development
programs and, therefore, need special attention. The government has set
out for itself an ambitious target to reduce the incidence of poverty to
about six percent of the population, or around 12 million, in 1999.

Theoretically, the bottom-up planning principle adopted for the
program is most appropriate because of the different characteristics of
the people in the 20,630 poor villages across the country. As the survey
showed, the pockets of poverty are mostly localized in terms of
geographical location, household size, occupation, age, gender and
education. Obviously, general growth programs would not be able to reach
these poor people effectively. A better targeting program is therefore
needed.

The government has published and disseminated manuals on the
directives for planning, the categories of businesses which can be
funded under the program, procedures for disbursement, reporting,
monitoring and evaluation. Subdistrict officials who are in charge of
supervising the program have been trained and the information campaign
for the program has been going on in the target villages over the last
few months.

But a formidable challenge remains. Local administration officials
are required to change their attitude with regard to the application of
the bottom-up planning principle. The officials, used to always having
the final say in every government-funded program in their areas, might
still be tempted to unnecessarily intervene into the use of the funds.

We do realize that the grassroots planning principle is not an easy
exercise, especially because many of the rural people may not be able to
articulate their wishes in a rational manner. Or their wishes may fall
way out of the categories of economic activities allowed to be funded
under the program. Local officials, therefore, should be patient in
helping the community groups to effectively use the funds as the seed
capital for income-generating activities. In this context, we are glad
that local officials are not pressured with specific targets within the
program implementation.

However, there is, we think, another factor that is crucial for the
success of the program. This program should not be implemented in
isolation. It should be supported with other general rural development
projects, notably those related to the development of public services
and basic infrastructure. Any economic activities financed under the
poverty alleviation program will be sustainable only when they are
inter-linked with the economy of other more developed areas.