<strong>Approaches</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>Improv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Delivery</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Social</strong> <strong>Services</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Difficult</strong> EnvironmentsExecutive Summary‣ This paper explores <strong>the</strong> challenges <strong>of</strong> service delivery <strong>in</strong> difficultenvironments for external ac<strong>to</strong>rs. It seeks <strong>to</strong> provide answers <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong>question <strong>of</strong> what type <strong>of</strong> approaches, and under which conditions, may bemost effective <strong>in</strong> order <strong>to</strong>: a) improve human development outcomes 1 forpoor and vulnerable people; and b) build pro poor, government-ledsystems.‣ The paper identifies some promis<strong>in</strong>g approaches <strong>to</strong> <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g access <strong>to</strong>services while build<strong>in</strong>g systems. Although <strong>the</strong> evidence base is weak, <strong>the</strong>follow<strong>in</strong>g appear <strong>to</strong> <strong>of</strong>fer prospects for scal<strong>in</strong>g up <strong>in</strong> difficult environments:♦ Where capacity is weak, consider work<strong>in</strong>g through government <strong>to</strong>contract out services <strong>to</strong> non-state providers focus<strong>in</strong>g on <strong>the</strong> MDGs as<strong>the</strong> key output measure.♦ Where <strong>the</strong>re is a lack <strong>of</strong> will, use a non-state mechanism <strong>to</strong> co-ord<strong>in</strong>atedonors, and <strong>to</strong> manage and moni<strong>to</strong>r both state and non-state providers.The United Nations has a comparative advantage <strong>to</strong> convene andcoord<strong>in</strong>ate donors <strong>in</strong> some difficult environments. Align with statesystems <strong>in</strong> order <strong>to</strong> facilitate handover.♦ Where both capacity and will are weak, work with humanitarian ac<strong>to</strong>rs<strong>to</strong> take a more long-term, programmatic approach <strong>to</strong> <strong>the</strong> delivery <strong>of</strong>services.♦ Work through local structures <strong>to</strong> move resources down <strong>to</strong> communitylevel, stimulate demand for services, moni<strong>to</strong>r service providers, andpromote positive political and social change.♦ On <strong>the</strong> demand side, consider social protection measures that reducevulnerability and facilitate access <strong>to</strong> services for <strong>the</strong> poor.‣ This paper argues that <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternational community should emphasiseservice delivery as a key entry po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>to</strong> fur<strong>the</strong>r development <strong>in</strong> difficultenvironments. The follow<strong>in</strong>g four reasons are expla<strong>in</strong>ed <strong>in</strong> more detail <strong>in</strong>Section II. The first one is that <strong>the</strong> MDG targets will not be achievedwithout <strong>in</strong>creased access <strong>to</strong> services <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>se contexts. The second one isthat <strong>the</strong>re is a ‘humanitarian imperative’ <strong>to</strong> respond <strong>to</strong> an emergencysituation where people’s access <strong>to</strong> services has been severely reduced orhas completely dim<strong>in</strong>ished. A third one is that service delivery may <strong>of</strong>fer anentry po<strong>in</strong>t for trigger<strong>in</strong>g longer-term pro-poor social, economic andpolitical change. F<strong>in</strong>ally, service delivery may help <strong>to</strong> prevent some statesfrom slid<strong>in</strong>g (back) <strong>in</strong><strong>to</strong> civil conflict by address<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> structural causes <strong>of</strong><strong>the</strong> conflict.1 Def<strong>in</strong>ed here as health and education outcomes as exemplified by <strong>the</strong> MDG targets.This work<strong>in</strong>g paper is <strong>in</strong>tended <strong>to</strong> stimulate public discussion. It is not necessarily DFID orUK Government policy4
<strong>Approaches</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>Improv<strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Delivery</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Social</strong> <strong>Services</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Difficult</strong> Environments‣ Section III describes <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong> challenges <strong>to</strong> support<strong>in</strong>g pro-poor servicedelivery <strong>in</strong> difficult environments. Whilst aware <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> limitations <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>World Development Report 2004 analysis, us<strong>in</strong>g this framework is a useful<strong>to</strong>ol <strong>to</strong> highlight <strong>the</strong> shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> relations between policy-makers,service providers and service users. A major challenge is <strong>to</strong> (re)buildeffective state <strong>in</strong>stitutions where <strong>the</strong>se have deteriorated, have beendestroyed by conflict or are depleted by HIV/AIDS or o<strong>the</strong>r humanresource constra<strong>in</strong>ts. In many places, <strong>the</strong> s<strong>in</strong>gle most important challenge<strong>to</strong> development is that <strong>the</strong> state does not have <strong>the</strong> capacity <strong>to</strong> supplyservices <strong>to</strong> poor people. Additionally, policy makers and politicians <strong>in</strong> somedifficult environments lack <strong>the</strong> political will <strong>to</strong> push forward a pro-pooragenda. F<strong>in</strong>ally, <strong>the</strong> complex <strong>in</strong>terplay between political will and statecapacity poses major obstacles <strong>to</strong> poor people’s access and participation<strong>in</strong> service delivery <strong>in</strong> difficult environments.‣ Given <strong>the</strong> myriad <strong>of</strong> challenges, <strong>the</strong> paper considers <strong>the</strong> approaches for<strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternational community <strong>to</strong>: streng<strong>the</strong>n pro-poor policy mak<strong>in</strong>g, buildprovider capacity and reduce barriers <strong>to</strong> people’s access and participation.Each <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se is <strong>in</strong> turn considered with regards <strong>to</strong> providers, policymakersas well as users.‣ With regards <strong>to</strong> streng<strong>the</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g pro-poor policy mak<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>the</strong> paper suggestsf<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g entry po<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>to</strong> build political will where it is lack<strong>in</strong>g, for <strong>in</strong>stancethrough Quick Impact Projects. Where will<strong>in</strong>gness exists, efforts <strong>to</strong> buildstate policy mak<strong>in</strong>g and implementation capacity <strong>in</strong>clude provid<strong>in</strong>g longtermtechnical assistance, support<strong>in</strong>g elements <strong>of</strong> recurrent expenditure,and f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g community recovery through decentralised structures.F<strong>in</strong>ally, <strong>the</strong> paper explores <strong>the</strong> possibilities for us<strong>in</strong>g non-statemechanisms for policy coord<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>in</strong> unwill<strong>in</strong>g or exceptionally weakenvironments. These may <strong>in</strong>clude UN agencies and <strong>the</strong> use <strong>of</strong> socialfunds, with care <strong>to</strong> not underm<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong> state’s ultimate responsibility forservice delivery.‣ In terms <strong>of</strong> build<strong>in</strong>g capacity, both state and non-state providers should beconsidered <strong>to</strong> streng<strong>the</strong>n service delivery. Decisions on <strong>the</strong> mostappropriate approach will partly depend on a thorough analysis <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>context, but a general observation is that <strong>in</strong> areas where <strong>the</strong>re is littlegovernment provision, and limited prospects <strong>of</strong> build<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> capacity forgovernment provision <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> short <strong>to</strong> medium term, <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>ternationalcommunity should consider harness<strong>in</strong>g non-state providers <strong>in</strong> ways that donot underm<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong> state. One possible way <strong>to</strong> do this is through some k<strong>in</strong>d<strong>of</strong> contract<strong>in</strong>g arrangement. Humanitarian agencies are also an importantsource <strong>of</strong> service provision <strong>in</strong> difficult environments. Donors should seek <strong>to</strong>work with <strong>the</strong>m <strong>to</strong> develop longer term, programmatic approaches <strong>in</strong>difficult environments, while not underm<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g core humanitarian pr<strong>in</strong>ciples.‣ With regards <strong>to</strong> reduc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> barriers <strong>to</strong> poor people’s access <strong>to</strong> andparticipation <strong>in</strong> basic services, streng<strong>the</strong>n<strong>in</strong>g voice, mov<strong>in</strong>g resources <strong>to</strong><strong>the</strong> community level and facilitat<strong>in</strong>g provider access are all discussed.Additionally, reduc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> costs <strong>of</strong> access<strong>in</strong>g services through socialThis work<strong>in</strong>g paper is <strong>in</strong>tended <strong>to</strong> stimulate public discussion. It is not necessarily DFID orUK Government policy5