The Girl-Child and Government Service Provision.pdf - Tanzania ...

ole models. Other educational barriers include schoolcalendars that conflict with girls’ domestic or market responsibilitiesand curricula and instructional strategies notrelevant to girls’ learning needs.Economic trends andreforms in TanzaniaDuring the colonial era in Tanzania the British and Germangovernments concentrated their activities on maintaininglaw and order and providing necessary services such astransportation infrastructure and urban water systemsand electricity. Social services such as health and educationwere shared between the government and missionaries.After independence in 1961, the national governmentinherited the colonial pattern of organisation andstructure.In 1967 the government passed a basic statement ofTanzania’s long-term development objectives: the ArushaDeclaration. This declaration provided a developmentpolicy that revolved around socialism, rural development,self-reliance and economic growth. An immediate resultof the Arusha Declaration was nationalisation of the strategicactivities of the economy. In rural areas programmewas put in place to make it easier and more convenient forgovernment to provide social services such as health andeducation to the people.Although Tanzania experienced reasonable macro-economicperformance until the mid-1970s, 1 unfavourable externalconditions wiped out the previous economic achievementsand led to the crisis of the early 1980s. The crisis manifesteditself in rising inflation – reaching a historically highfigure of 36 per cent in 1984 – and a balance-of-paymentscrisis. It is generally agreed that the economic crisis wascaused mainly by trade decline, a fourfold rise in oil prices,a rise in food-grain prices, the war with Uganda, the breakup of the East African Community and the severe droughtsof 1973–74 and 1981–82 (Maliyamkono and Bagachwa1990; Sepehri 1992).It was during this period that the Tanzanian governmentstarted negotiations with the IMF and the World Bankwhich led to the adoption of a series of structural adjustmentand economic recovery programmes in the 1980s(Messkoub 1995).In 1982 the government adopted a three-year structuraladjustment programme (SAP), prepared with the cooperationof the World Bank and based on the advice of theTanzanian Advisory Group. This SAP was an exclusivelynational effort; it had no World Bank or IMF financial support.At first the SAP did not result in any significantchanges in Tanzania’s economic performance because thegovernment was reluctant to implement the policy measures.It was not until fiscal year 1984–85 that Tanzanialaunched its first significant reform aimed at liberalising theeconomy.In 1987 the government adopted a three-year economicrecoveryprogramme. During the course of the programme,Tanzania obtained an 18-month standby arrangementwith the IMF in August 1986 and a MultisectorRehabilitation Credit from the International DevelopmentAgency and donor governments in November 1986. Furthermore,Tanzania became eligible for the rescheduling ofloans in the Paris Club, including the postponement andcancellation of existing principal and interest in October1986. Finally, in July 1987, under the SAP, the IMF approveda US$67.9 million special drawing rights loan in support ofthe economic-recovery programme.In 1996 the IMF approved a three-year credit under theEnhanced Structural Adjustment Programme to supportTanzania’s economic-recovery programme for 1996/97–1998/99. The new programme emphasised fiscal performanceand structural reforms, namely,• building administrative capacity for improving developmentmanagement;• maintaining a stable fiscal stance and using public resourcesmore efficiently;• promoting the private sector by deregulating investmentand divesting parastatals;• providing greater support for primary education andbasic health care;• supporting the development of basic infrastructure,especially to give impetus to rural agricultural development;and• restructuring the financial sector to respond to theneeds of the private sector.The SAPs of the 1980s have not been without costs, bothin terms of non-growth economic indicators and the burdenthat these programmes have imposed on the population.In general, “adjustment policies affected the poor inthree broad ways: first they affect their incomes, eitherthrough changes in wages and employment, or throughThe Girl-Child and Government Service Provision 35