|
Learning from People Centered Development
in
Pakistan
FAYYAZ
BAQIR
Devolution
and government managed services
The need
for devolution of power has arisen because of government’s
failure in three specific areas. First, there is lack of
operation or poor performance of service facilities installed by
the government. Secondly in low-income areas the government
functionaries are providing services illegally in return for
personal gains. Thirdly the government has failed in providing
basic services in low-income areas whereas the informal and
non-government sector has very successfully provided these
services to residents of these areas on user fee basis.
On close
scrutiny we find that while government has provided facilities
in social sector in large numbers, these facilities are not
delivering services. This is visible in the case of thousands of
ghost schools, abandoned health centres, neglected water supply
schemes and choked sewerage lines. At the same time we can see
effective service delivery in theses areas by communities, NGOs
and informal sector. Main reason of failure in this case is
selection of unsuitable site for the facility due to political
pressure. Other important factors include hiring high level
professionals or cronies of local patron instead of inducting
and training community level specialists for providing these
services. The most important reason that leads to lack of
operation and maintenance of these services by communities is
lack of selection of low cost design for providing social
services to low income groups
Secondly in
most of the low income communities government does not provide
services through its relevant
departments and line agencies and people are still receiving
these services illegally from the government. In this case
people are fully paying for their services but the fee is going
to corrupt government employees and not to government exchequer.
Thirdly
there are instances of NGOs providing services to the low-income
settlements in the absence of government departments. This is
the case with sanitation, credit, shelter, health and education
in many urban settlements and construction of infrastructure,
provision of extension services and credit in rural areas. Here
NGOs have used grant funding as an investment in social capital
or raised resources entirely from the beneficiary community to
build, operate and maintain a service.
The Alternative Path:
During the
past two decades considerable development work has been done in
low- income urban and rural communities by numerous
non-government initiatives.
Experience of these successful initiatives provides very
valuable insights for improving the management of services by
government departments through devolution of power.
Informal
sector has functioned as main propeller of growth engine in the
urban economy, which is host to 55% of
Pakistan’s
population according to the latest census. Almost 80% of urban
employment is generated in this sector and it also adds 80% of
the value originating in manufacturing sector. Shifting
population patterns and development of informal sector have been
accompanied by shift of the power base; from patronage by landed
aristocracy to the rise of so-called power brokers and
commission mafias. Urban centres have also emerged as connecting
thread between spatially scattered rural settlements. Principles
used by the informal sector and mafias were identified and
applied by the successful grass roots initiatives as part of the
new paradigm for development. This led to provision of basic
services to1 million people of Orangi
by OPP and replication of its work in 67 locations throughout
the country. SKAA was the leading government agency to
understand and use these principles for regularizing and
upgrading 250 Katchi
Abadsis and providing shelter to 5
million people.
In rural
areas a network of rural support programmes
emerged due to the successful demonstration of a
development model by Aga Khan Rural Support Programme (AKRSP).The
RSPs of Pakistan have aimed at
reducing poverty and raising the standards of living of the
rural poor by harnessing the potential of the people to help
themselves. They have done this by forming village based
Community Organizations (COs) or Village Organizations (VOs)
for men, and Women Organizations (WOs)
for women.. Through these COs/VOs/WOs,
RSPs have provided assistance to the
rural poor in the form of training and upgrading of human
skills, credit, technical advice or linkages to private and
public sector agencies.
Studies
conducted for AKRSP, the oldest of the RSPs,
show that within the first 10 years of operation, AKRSP was able
to double the incomes, in real terms, of the people in the
Northern Areas and Chitral. Similar
studies conducted at the newer RSPs
provide evidence of increased incomes, higher farm and off-farm
productivity, greater awareness, female empowerment and
reduction in poverty levels in their areas of operation.
Achievements of RSPs can be known
from the fact that RSP network in
Pakistan
has formed 16,295
COs
with a total memberships of 446,820 having total savings of
Rs.650.2 million. Total number of activists trained by RSP
network is 107,024 and total credit disbursed by them is Rs.2,
850 million. RSP network has also completed 5,114 physical
infrastructure schemes.
The New Paradigm:
These
successful experiments in rural and urban areas have offered a
new vision and approach for development, governance and
management. This new vision can be summed up in the form of
three new paradigms. A brief description of these new paradigms
is given below.
Development Paradigm:
New development paradigm has shifted the focus of development
from upper and middle income groups to low income groups, from
formal to informal sector and from subsidy and external
assistance to self help. This paradigm has also laid emphasis on
human and social capital rather than physical capital as a key
element for self sustained growth. This has meant moving from
mega projects to community level interventions and supporting
what people are doing rather than seeking people’s support for
externally designed technical solutions.
Governance Paradigm:
In the
domain of governance new paradigm has followed the path of
reducing the size of government and increasing the role of
non-government and informal sector enterprises, as well as
private sector . It has also aimed at
changing relationship between the government and civil society.
At community level the new initiatives have asked the people to
take responsibility for development work at household, lane and
neighbourhood level and seek
government help for building structures and providing services
at higher levels. This is called the so- called
internal-external development model. Another important dimension
of this paradigm is creation of entrepreneurial government
Entrepreneurial governance in this context entails
i) lesser government control on
management of cities and provision of services ii) lesser
government control on flow of information iii) free availability
and access to information and resources in public domain.
Management
Paradigm:
New
management paradigm followed by leading government and
non-government agencies consists of the following principles. i)
Simplifying and clarifying operational procedures to reduce
delays and possibilities for receiving kickbacks. ii)
Decentralization of planning and execution and
institutionalizing local responsibility for quick and community
oriented development work. iii) Checks on local decision makers
are created by community participation in designing and
financing development programmes. Each community is treated as a
separate community, so there are no fixed standards and
specifications to be followed. In addition local officials are
required to go to the people and do not ask them to visit their
offices. iv) Explicit job
responsibilities for the officials and professionals so that no
one can hide behind the structural ambiguities. v) Reducing
costs by finding low cost solutions and reducing overheads
vi). Charging community members for
the services provided. vii) Delivering services in the field.
Moving from
professional to para professionals
and from top-down planning to community based planning
viii)Moving from supply oriented mechanism to creation of good
receiving mechanisms ix) Moving from tyranny of the professional
to professional accountability.
It has led
to the creation of a local decision making system for
development planning and establishment of participatory
institutions for identification of priorities and allocation of
resources. There are no permanent jobs for professionals.
Contractual agreements are based on merit and contracts are
extended on the basis of performance. Competitive remuneration
package are offered to the professionals keeping in view the
market for services. Regular monitoring and reporting is an
integral part of development work. External evaluations and
continuous visits by outsiders also act as effective checks on
quality of work. On the job reward is related to achievement,
performance and transparency.
The New Paradigm and Devolution of Power
What is
missing from the current plan?
Devolution
of power plan proposes to accomplish the following: a) Devolving
power from federal and provincial governments to district
governments b) Increased share of power to representatives of
minorities and women c) Subordinating the power of civil
servants to the power of elected representatives. In nutshell it
aims at shifting power from one group of representatives to
another group of representatives. It has two basic flaws. First
it does not devolve power to the people-ordinary citizens who
suffer at the hands of power elites. Second it does not provide
any mechanism to check the power of local representatives by the
electorate. Under devolution citizens have the power to vote and
elect. They have no power to check corrupt officials, sack
corrupt politicians and challenge unjust decisions of people in
public offices. Our court system, army monitoring cells,
internal department regulations, street agitations and army
takeovers only curb elite powers partially and for very short
duration. Devolution of power has no tested formula for creating
a permanent check on the powers of various elites.
Power of elite and power of the people:
Devolution
of power does not offer any opportunity for delivering goods to
the people because the People are not involved in planning,
monitoring, executing and maintaining they
services they want to have. Successive experiments in fighting
corruption have also shown that a group of elite cannot check
the corruption of another group of elite effectively. This
has been confirmed by the Devolution of Power Plan itself, which
states in clause 2.2.1.0 “
When potential interventions were instigated through
judicial and anti corruption process these institutions were
shown the benefits of the institutional arrangements as their
share of the plunder was allocated to them for further
consolidation of the de-facto system. This system became more
and more syndicated when what used to be considered
favours for a friend in need to
speed up the process of administration were translated into
fixed percentage for departments based on their nuisance value.”
It is easy
for a corrupt group to bribe, resist and harass another watchdog
group.
It is
impossible for an elite group to succeed in use of these tactics
with the people in large numbers.
What people
need is more than the power to vote and elect. People do not
need power, which can only be exercised once in five years
against the abuse and injustice meted out to them on day-to-day
basis. They do not need power, which cannot bring the skeletons
in the closets of public officials for public scrutiny. What
mechanism can ensure the exercise of power by people over their
so called representatives- NGOs, elected representative, and
government functionaries- on daily basis.
There is only one mechanism, organization of the people.
Organization provides continuity of people’s power in time and
space over discretionary power of elite.
According to Devolution of Power Plan 3.1.2.2.
“They may be created for the purposes the community prioritizes.
The specialized focus of these organizations will reflect
community priorities. Mobilizing community resources will
commensurately increase access to government programs”.
People’s Organizations:
People’s
organizations may exist in the form of Interest groups
such as voter’s union, tax payer’s union, victims of court
negligence, and trade unions; Development institutions
such as village organization, women organization, water users
association and micro credit receiver’s group; Watch dogs and
advocacy groups such as consumers’ union, human right groups
and NGOs. These forms of people’s organization uphold power
of the people on daily basis because they
provide matching power to people in terms of numbers, financial
resources, experience and influence for neutralizing elite power
and ensure flow of development resources allocated by government
in line with the preferences of people by giving them right to
vote in their Village Organization (VO )
for every economic decision. Aga Khan Rural Support Programme (AKRSP)
and other RSPs in this regard set the example. These
RSPs now cover nearly 50% districts
of
Pakistan.
The ordinary villagers decide each and every development scheme
in these VOs and development budget is spent by
RSPs accordingly.
Since in VOs officer bearers are not
appointed by elections but selected by the whole VO by
consensus, it leads to elimination of rival political groups. In
cities “town meetings” replace VOs
for this purpose. POs and VOs
conduct citizen’s dialogues with government for judicious use of
resources. Cases in point are the dialogue by a coalition of
Citizen’s organizations in
Karachi,
which led to cancellation of Karachi Mass Transit Plan and
Sindh Government’s rejection of
Asian Development Bank’s Loan of $100million for
Korangi Creek Waste Treatment Plant.
These are unprecedented successes and show the vigor, technical
competence and effectiveness of citizens’ organizations in
combating, waste and dependence created by ill conceived
development assistance plans and demonstrate their superb
negotiating skills. Fighting white-collar crimes and kidnapping
and car lifting would not have been effectively done in
Karachi
if it were not for the services of CPLC and Transparency
International as watchdog for protecting the interests of
marginalized groups. URC has similarly watched the interests of
residents of Katchi
Abadis.
Peoples
Organizations and Poverty Alleviation:
“Many
observers of
Pakistan’s
economy have focused lately on its “financing gap” – whether
there will be enough government deficit reduction, combined with
adequate domestic and external financing, to service the large
public debt (92 percent of GDP).
…
restoring growth potential requests
closing
Pakistan’s
other gap : the “social gap.” International evidence relates
social progress to future growth potential
Pakistan
systematically under-performs on most social indicators …
education, health sanitation, fertility, and gender equality –
for its level of income improvements in these indicators have
also not been commensurate with its rate of GDP per capita
growth over time. Large inequalities exist between men and
women, between urban and rural areas, and between provinces. The
Social Action Program (SAP) that sought to address this lag in
the last 8 yeas has largely failed”. Filling this social gap was
the main objective of SAP.
Ironically
while Dr. Mahbub
ul Haq’s
diagnosis of the factors responsible for underdevelopment was
acclaimed worldwide but his proposed solution did not succeed.
This happened due to limited understanding of the role and
process of POs. Dr. Akhter Hamid
Khan very well captured and described the role and significance
of POs. According to Dr. Khan when you contact a community they
are aware of their problems but they also have ideas for
solutions. There are two types of solutions: dreams and
solutions possible within means. For example for irrigation of
plants you can desire to have a canal.or
use a donkey cart to water the plants at roots. Solution within
means reflects community’s resource endowment. Communities have
relative abundance of land and labor. They can provide
Para
professionals for training and land or room to house a facility.
“It would be very wrong if I boast that I did this or that. I
merely observed a lot of things then founded supporting
institutions. But the people did the work themselves.”
In
his talk at NRSP he said “we could not have done this work
ourselves. When they saw outside, they would ask us to do it for
them. If I went to them and said, ‘you people make the lane.
They would ask, ‘what are you her for? What do you have? Their
first question was always, ‘what have you come to give us/.
However, they could not ask their own man [the activist] what he
had come to give them”. This statement clearly shows the
strategic importance of giving lead role to community rather
than its representatives in sustainable poverty alleviation. On
another occasion Dr. Khan said “Whatever foreign investment was
sent to
Germany
under Marshal Plan, four times higher funds
was received by
Bangladesh
in 1978 but no results appeared. Progress is never achieved with
money but with the dedication and hard work of the workers. When
community stand up, idealist emerges,
who sacrifice, work hard thereby resulting progress and
prosperity in the community.
Difference
between participatory and representational development;
The case of Diagnostic Survey.
Diagnostic
Survey the community mobilization tool used by AKRSP very
clearly illustrates the difference in approach, dynamics and
outcome of service delivery between participatory and
representational approach.
“The
Diagnostic Survey starts with a visit by the Management Group to
a village whose residents have agreed to meet with AKRSP staff.
The General Manager initiates the first dialogue by explaining
the OBJECTIVES AND METHODS OF AKRSP to the villagers. He then
invites them to identify an income generating project that would
benefit most of the households in the village and that can be
undertaken by the villagers themselves. Almost invariably,
villagers are able to agree on a project of over-riding
importance to all villagers. Thus, the result of the first
dialogue is the IDENTIFICATION of a small, productive project by
the residents of a village.
The
identification of a project is followed by the second series of
dialogues. The first step here involves a FEASIBILITY SURVEY of
the proposed scheme. Supervisory responsibility for this
technical assessment rests with the Programme Senior Engineer or
Programme Senior Agriculturist. Responsibility in the field
devolves on the Social Organization Unit. This unit works with
informed village residents to assess the feasibility of proposed
project and to obtain data on prices of locally available
inputs/material. It is on the basis of information obtained
locally that BLUEPRINTS and COST ESTIMATES are prepared by the
field unit and sent to the Management Group for finalization.
The finalized scheme is taken to the villagers by the Management
Group and discussed with them. This starts the third dialogue,
in which AKRSP and the residents of the village explore the
TERMS OF PARTNERSHIP that would characterize the relationship
between the two entities. On behalf of AKRSP, these terms of
partnership are explained as general principles of rural
development that have proved successful elsewhere in the world.
In turn, the villagers could demonstrate their ACCEPTANCE of
these terms by spelling out precisely the manner in which they
would organize to plan, implement, mange and maintain specific
projects that involve physical works, skill development and the
creation of equity capital over time. At this stage, a Village
Organization is formed, consisting of all beneficiaries of the
project. An assessment of project benefits, conducted by
concerned members of the Management Group, follows the formation
of the organization. This completes the Diagnostic Survey.”
This
approach has led to
formation of 17,732 Female COs and
42,276 Male COs by RSPN in year 2004 alone . RSP total saving
amount in the same year was 1,085.678 Rs.millions, total credit
disbursed was Rs. 9,407.191millions
and number of physical infrastructure schemes initiated was
46,178. In 2004 RSPN also established 1086
community school and trained 1,936 teachers In addition
4,152.traditional birth attendants were also trained.
Community
participation has also been an integral component of the way our
society organized itself before the British
Raj. The villages in Indo Pak sub continent met all
their needs due to an elaborated system of exchanges and
collaborative mechanisms. That is why the sub continent was
known as a country made of countless “village republics”. All
these village republics arranged many basic services on the
basis of voluntary contributions. G.W.
Leitner, Director Public Instruction Punjab in 1852 noted
that there is one word, which adequately captures this spirit of
voluntary contribution, and that is the word “Lillah”.
This tradition was broken with the advent of British
Raj and continued in a low-key
manner in the subsequent period.
The
tradition has, however, re-emerged as Participatory Development
Approach with the inception of two land mark programmes in 1980;
The Aga Khan Rural Support Programme in the North and the
Orangi Pilot Project in the South.
Both these programmes were conceived and guided by the leading
thinker of community development Dr. Akhter
Hamid Khan. Dr. Khan had the special gift of looking at poor
people as the core resources for development of Pakistani
society and he proved the vitality of his ideas by successful
implementation in the field. He has shown us the way “back to
the future”.
The significance of people’s participation is more than just
delivering basic services. It is an integral part of people
centered development. That is why devolution cannot achieve the
poverty alleviation targets it without making it an integral
part of the devolution plan. Social mobilization helps reduce
poverty in so many ways. First and foremost social mobilization
helps development assistance organizations in fixing the
priorities for development at local level. Poor people may be
illiterate, but they are quite intelligent. Their involvement in
development planning unleashes their creative energies to
achieve their development goals within their means. We see
numerous examples of improvement in livelihoods through social
mobilization in
Pakistan.
There are success stories of community-based work in improvement
of sanitation, solid waste management, provision of shelter, job
creation, income generation natural resource management,
healthcare, education and rural development.
Secondly
social mobilization also helps low income communities make use
of economies of scale in the production and marketing processes
and compete effectively in markets. This has been most effective
in building local infrastructures all over
Pakistan.
During the process of community mobilization people cross
economic barriers by forming community organization, pooling
resources, collective saving, collective purchase, cost sharing
with others, changing specifications in design, getting
opportunity for self-employment and having sense of ownership of
development work. They can use collective savings to build
collateral for bank borrowing, rise money to lay sewerage lines,
pay fee for home school teacher, control hunting, grazing and
deforestation and, undertake land reclamation.
Thirdly
with community mobilization utilization of different resources
tends to be integrated systemically. To make optimal use of the
village opportunities, it is important that villagers have the
management capacity to integrate the assistance available from
outside agencies with their own specific needs. In addition
social mobilization helps communities achieve value for money.
If
resources are channeled into the community rather than outside
contractors community partnering can double the benefits
obtained from investment. Infrastructure is provided and
employment opportunities and enterprises are created in the
community. People are empowered to take more control of their
own lives, increased access to local
knowledge is gained on such issues as the location of existing
services and a reduction in the potential for disputes with
community members in the course of work on site.
Finally if
community members are involved in development work that they
have financed and managed, they are willing to operate and
maintain it at their own cost, which is considerably lower than
the cost of similar formal sector operation and maintenance.
Success of
Participatory Approach in a Government Department:
Participatory approach is not the hallmark of NGO alone. It has
produced equally effective results in Government as we.
Provision of shelter to homeless by Sindh
Katchi Abadi
Authority (SKAA) is case in point. According to DG SKAA Mr.
Tasneem Siddiqui basic issue in Katchi
Abadi is of tenure. People live here
without ownership title and services development. In small towns
and peri- urban areas of
Punjab, undeveloped
residential areas have sprung up by subdivision of agricultural
lands and need to be upgraded like other
KAs. In Sindh Mafia operates
in state land. In other provinces unplanned residential areas
emerge in private lands. In
Karachi 40% people live in
recognized KAs whereas in
Pakistan
as a whole 30% population lives in KAs.
This ratio increases if we add un-serviced housing schemes. In
Pakistan
75% people are low-income and a shelter policy needs to be
designed keeping in view their needs Government’s housing
schemes for low-income people have not been successful because
they have overlooked this fact. As a result they end up helping
the middle class people. We have an annual demand of 0.5 million
housing units. To solve this problem Mafia moves in. They take
over the role of government. But this way the cost of land goes
to Mafia instead of government. As population of cities grows,
central business districts are taken over by the middle and
high-income groups and low-income people are pushed to the
periphery. This has serious economic consequences.
Average community time in
Karachi for example
in 2 hours. This adds to national loss of resources.
Developing
and delivery method adopted by government agencies has some
basic flaws. For example two lakh
plots in Sindh are lying unused.
Purchasers need to make 25 % down payment and pay another 25% in
next 6 months. Given the price and payment schedule low-income
people cannot purchase these plots. There is also no time limit
to complete construction. It therefore offers good opportunities
to the speculators to invest in these plots while the
Katchi Abadis
keep growing. Government interventions do not succeed because:
i) Government
sells fully developed land which increases the cost of
land and low-income people cannot buy it. Under
Apna Ghar
scheme, for example, the cost of a small plot was
Rs. 700,000 way beyond the
purchasing power of low income residents. ii) The plots are sold
by balloting , therefore only a small
fraction of people can buy it. This method does not allow for
meeting the housing needs. The
alternative is : i) To sell
undeveloped land at affordable price in easy to pay
installments, ii) To create an easy entry system by doing away
the balloting and , iii) undertake incremental development so
that development expenses can be paid by the residents in easy
installments. iv) Possession should
be given only to those purchasers who settle down in the housing
scheme. This is the method used by the so called land grabbers
and it works. Due to easy installments residents are able to pay
and their lease money covers the cost of land, development and
staff salary.
Policy
guidelines during Junejo Government
banned eviction and permitted regularization of KAS. However
dangerous zones as well as amenity areas e.g. parks, schools,
etc. were excluded from this process. In line with the policy of
the governments of Mr. Bhutto and Mr.
Junejo Sindh a
Katchi Abadis
Act was passed in Sindh on the basis
of which Sindh
Katchi Abadis Authority (SKAA)
was formed and operated. SKAA notifies
Katchi Abadis and
collaborates with KMC. Subsequently SKAA regularized 500
Katchi Abadis
in
Karachi and with extension of
its programme to Thatta,
Islamabad and other urban
centers all over
Pakistan
provided shelter to tens of thousands of urban poor.
Bibliography:
1.
Aga Khan Rural Support Programme. First Progress
Report: Dec 1882-April 1083, Gilgit:
AKRSP, 1983
2.
Baqir, Fayyaz “Back to
Office Report NGORC Workshop on NGO Self Regulation”
Internal document : 9th August 2000.
3.
Baqir, Fayyaz “Back to Office Report: Global Forum on
Regional Development Policy,
Nagoya,
Japan”.
Internal document: December 1998.
4.
Baqir, Fayyaz. The Role of NGOs in Education,
Islamabad: Trust
for Voluntary Organizations 1993.
5.
Baqir, Fayyaz. The Role of NGO’s in education: TVO
Status report #1,
Islamabad: TVO,
1993.
6.
Easterly,William
“Pakistan’s
critical constraint: not the financing gap but the social gap”
Unpublished background paper for
Pakistan
poverty assessment(n.p): World Bank,
2001.
7.
Hasan, Arif. The unplanned Revolution: Observation on
the process of socio-Economic change in
Pakistan,
Karachi: City
Press, 2002
8.
Husain, Tariq “Operational Insights from Twenty Years
of AKRSP: Social Mobilisation.”
Gilgit: Aga Khan Rural Support
Programme; consultant’s report 2003.
9.
Husain, Tariq. “Enabling environment, sustainable
livelihood and social sector development in
Pakistan.”
(Keynote Paper. International Union for the Conservation
of Nature, National Conservation Strategy Workshop,
Islamabad, August
1986.) Published in Towards a National Conservation Strategy
for
Pakistan;
Lahore: Asian Art
Press, 1987.
10.
Husain, Tariq. Research, planning and the
mobilisation of small farmers for
rural development: The reformist agenda. (National
Conference on Small Peasants and Rural Structure, Lahore, August
1986.) Published in
Pakistan
Administration, vol. 23 (2), July-December 1986.
11.
Husain, Tariq and Khan, Shoaib Sultan. “Principles and
implementation for small farmer development.”
Islamabad: Annual
Conference,
Pakistan
Society of Development Economists, 1984.
12.
Hussein, Maliha ; Khan, Hussain and
Alam, Zahur Husain Tariq. “An
evaluation of irrigation projects undertaken by AKRSP in the
Gilgit District of Northern
Pakistan,” in Public Intervention in Farmer-Managed Irrigation
Systems, IIMI and the Water and Energy Commission Secretariat of
the Ministry of Water Resources, Government of Nepal, 1987.
13.
Journalist resource Center.The
life and times of Dr.Akhter
Hameed Khan: symposium report 4-5
March,2000.
Lahore: JRC,2000
14.
Khan, Akhter Hamid. Notes from a
talk at NRSP, Islamabad:
3 January 1993.
15. Khan, Akhter Hamid.
Orangi Pilot Project:
reminiscences and reflections,
Karachi: Oxford
University Press, 1996
16. Korten,
David C. “The Poverty of Foreign Aid” The International
Journal of Technical Cooperation vol. 2 no.1
Summer 1996. Pp. 99-105
17. Lodhran
Pilot Project. First Quarterly Report, unpublished report
April-June 1999
18. Lodhran
Pilot Project. Progress Report, April 2000-February
2001-10-03.
19. Lodhran
Pilot Project. Second Progress Report, July
99-March 2000.
20.
Local Initiative Facility for Urban Environment. The Life and
Times of Dr. Akhter
Hameed Khan’s symposium Report
JRC,
Lahore: 4-5 March
2000.
21. Malik,
Abdul; Effendi, Ali and Darjat,
Muhammad “Operational Insights from Twenty Years of AKRSP:
Community Infrastructure.” Gilgit:
Aga Khan Rural Support Programme; consultants’ report 2003
22. National Rural Support Programme-NRSP.
Dr.Akhtar Hameed
Khan’s development lessons learnt by experience: talks given at
NRSP’S annual review sessions.
Islamabad:
NRSP,1998
23. Soto, Hernando de. The mystery of capital: why capitalism
triumphs in the West and fails everywhere else,
New York: Basic
Books 2000United Nations Development Programme. Human
Development Report 1996
New York:
24. UNDP, Report on 3rd LIFE Grantee NGOs Workshop, 1998,
Fisalabad ,
Islamabad
25. Zaidi, Akbar S. Can the public sector deliver? An
examination of the work of the Sindh
Katchi Abadis
authority,
Karachi: City
Press,2001
|
