![]() |
|||||||||
| |
|||||||||
Another area where the Development Hierarchy comes into play is environmental sustainability. I do not question the importance of this issue and noted some people were interesting in increasing the discussion on the issue. However, the concern originates very much at the top of the hierarchy as a donor agenda. It is well supported by the implementer and accepted by the clients. However, it is well outside the basic survival concerns of the beneficiaries that ultimately have to accept the concerns. At this point it interacts with what I normally refer to as the "economic time frame". That is how far into the future you are able to project. For most of us that is sufficiently far so to expect a comfortable life, peaceful retirement and eventually a quiet departure surrounded by loving family members. For may smallholders eking their subsistence living from the limited lands they have the means to manage, their economic time frame will contract to perhaps a cropping season or year at most. In this case any effort to assist them has to be with returns that can be obtained within their economic time frame. Anything with returns outside the economic time frame they will not be interested in as they can not project the benefits being suitable for them. If you are interested in promoting conservation practices that will improve the long term sustainability of their land but require some sacrifice in the short term. It is a tough sell. The short term is just too critical. With regards to concept economic time frame the best illustration would be: A young women with 3 children at home and husband who as taken off for other pastures. She come to the rest house for the evening and someone is willing to pay for her companionship but does not like protective measures. With starvation for herself and her children 2 weeks away and HIV/AIDS a couple years away, what is a poor women to do? Promoting prevention may not be the big issue. Dick Tinsley
Please visit dfid-agriculture-consultation.nri.org.