Institutional sustainability: at what price? UNDP and the new cost-sharing model in Brazil

By the turn of the twenty-first century, UNDP had embraced a new form of funding based on ‘cost-sharing’, with this source accounting for 51 per cent of the organisation’s total expenditure worldwide in 2000. Unlike the traditional donor - recipient relationship so common with development projects, the new cost-sharing modality has created a situation whereby UNDP local offices become ‘subcontractors’ and agencies of the recipient countries become ‘clients’. This paper explores this transition in the context of Brazil, focusing on how the new modality may have compromised UNDP’s ability to promote Sustainable Human Development, as established in its mandate. The great enthusiasm for this modality within the UN system and its potential application to other developing countries increase the importance of a systematic assessment of its impact and developmental consequences.

Cost-sharing of agricultural technology transfer in Nigeria: perceptions of farmers and extension professionals

Cost-sharing, which involves government-farmer partnership in the funding of agricultural extension service, is one of the reforms aimed at achieving sustainable funding for extension systems. This study examined the perceptions of farmers and extension professionals on this reform agenda in Nigeria. The study was carried out in six geopolitical zones of Nigeria. A multi-stage random sampling technique was applied in the selection of respondents. A sample size of 268 farmers and 272 Agricultural Development Programme (ADP) extension professionals participated in the study. Both descriptive and inferential statistics were used in analysing the data generated from this research. The results show that majority of farmers (80.6%) and extension professionals (85.7%) had favourable perceptions towards cost-sharing. Furthermore, the overall difference in their perceptions was not significant (t =0.03). The study concludes that the strong favourable perception held by the respondents is a pointer towards acceptance of the reform. It therefore recommends that government, extension administrators and policymakers should design and formulate effective strategies and regulations for the introduction and use of cost-sharing as an alternative approach to financing agricultural technology transfer in Nigeria.

Poverty, HIV, and barriers to education: street children's experiences in Tanzania

This article discusses the links between poverty, HIV/AIDS, and barriers to education, based on the first-hand experiences of ‘street children’ in northern Tanzania. Within the context of national levels of poverty, ‘cost-sharing’ in health and education sectors, and the AIDS epidemic, poor families in Tanzania are under considerable pressure, and increasing numbers of girls and boys are consequently seeking a living independently on the streets of towns and cities. My research with street children shows that some children orphaned by AIDS are subject to rejection and exploitation by the extended family after the death of their parent(s). They are exposed to considerable risks of abuse, sexual violence and HIV within the street environment. Here, I discuss the links between poverty, HIV and barriers to education, which compound young people’s vulnerability, and offer some policy recommendations in response to the young people’s experiences.

Economic rationale for interventions to control livestock disease

Disease in farm animals has significant economic impacts on livestock production and incurs substantial costs for societies. Impacts affect not only livestock farms and the livestock industries but also sectors outside of farming. Important negative externalities of livestock disease include impacts on the health of other producers’ livestock, on human health, and on animal welfare. Good disease risk management/biosecurity and good animal welfare are public goods. Not taking account of these externality and public good aspects can lead to a misallocation of resources for livestock disease control. In such instances, there may be a strong case for government or other authority to intervene to ensure a better use of resources. There are a number of policy instruments that can be implemented for this purpose. One potential instrument is a Farm Animal Health and Welfare Stewardship Scheme funded under Pillar II of the CAP. A number of countries have public–private partnership cost-sharing schemes that aim to share appropriately both responsibilities and costs of epidemic livestock disease. There is a strong future agenda for appropriate intervention by governments in the management of livestock disease risks, including responsibility and cost sharing for livestock disease control, within the European Union and elsewhere.