The
Significance of Local Level Rural Infrastructure Provision in Poverty
Alleviation: Evidence from the horse’s mouth
Paper presented by Tatenda Mbara,
Achieving the Millennium Development Goals for
5 - 6 May
2007
ABSTRACT:
The main arguments in this paper can be summarized as follows:
·
Poverty is prevalent in the rural areas in
·
By and large, transport infrastructure can
have a significant impact on peoples’ livelihoods as it enhances access to
goods and services but impacts depends on the level at which such interventions
are implemented
·
Transport infrastructure is mainly
perceived and associated with expensive mega projects such as highways and
bridges. However, most trips undertaken by rural folks are meant to fulfil
basic social and economic needs. These trips are therefore short, but the
burden in respect of the amount of time and effort is very considerable.
·
In light of the above, the provision of local level rural
transport infrastructure, can go a long way in
fulfilling the MDGs. Rural people do not need highways and bridges to access
most of the goods and services that they need as the majority of these trips
are off-road. Provision of local level transport infrastructure such as
footbridges and footpaths as well as non transport interventions (but with a
bearing on access) such as the provision and appropriate location of facilities
such as boreholes, grinding mills, etcetera in order
to minimize distances traveled would greatly assist rural communities in making
the requisite goods and services available.
·
Evidence from the case study covered in this paper has shown that
the provision of local level infrastructure can make a meaningful contribution
to poverty alleviation through enhanced accessibility and time savings which
can be re-allocated for other income generating activities.
One of the
greatest contemporary challenges is poverty alleviation. Interestingly, the
issue is not new but it is the emphasis that has changed over time. Nearly 25
years ago, Robert McNamara (then President of the World Bank), in a speech he
presented in
. This agreement resulted in many donor agencies to reassess their development strategies. The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach (SLA) initiated by the Department for International Development (DFID) and the World Bank’s Report on “Attaching Poverty” were some of the responses to the UN Social Summit’s call to address poverty.
The Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) once again brought the world’s attention to the dire
need to fight poverty, as evidenced by the overriding objective – “eradication
of eradicating extreme poverty and hunger”. Any meaningful strategy to address
the problem of poverty in
Notwithstanding the fact that there was no direct reference to transport in the enunciation of the MDG statement, transport infrastructure and services are central to the attainment of the MDGs. Transport infrastructure and the requisite services are essential in enhancing rural people’s access to goods and services and in turn improving their livelihoods. Kerf and Smith (1996) argued that infrastructure and in particular transport and telecommunications, had a significant impact on levels and patterns of development, affecting inter alia, access to health and education services, the ability of industries to compete in international markets as well as capacity for effective governance. The World Development Report (1994), pointed out that good infrastructure has the potential to boost poor people’s productivity by lowering transaction and or production costs thereby enhancing economic growth and employment creation.
More so, infrastructure provision can arguably be discussed in the context of human rights issues especially within the context of universal access to basic needs and information. In this regard one may want to view ‘easy access’ with respect to the removal of barriers in terms of cost, distance, relevance, appropriateness and quality of infrastructure and service provision, especially for the benefit of the vulnerable groups such as the poor in rural areas. Against the above backdrop, the importance of developing infrastructure cannot be overemphasized.
Transport Infrastructure is however normally associated with mega projects such as highways, bridges and airports. Such perceptions are reminiscent of my 10 years experience as a lecturer. In 1997, I introduced a Rural Accessibility module at my institute. My introductory lecture always seeks to ascertain students’ perception of the major problems and solutions of rural transport. The answers I got over the years have been very consistent. The common problems cited include lack of surfaced roads, inadequate bridges and fewer buses. The solutions to these problems were centered on surfacing of rural roads, construction of bridges and acquisition of more buses. Such perceptions are not only harbored by students, but by many people including some professionals. While conventional approaches to transport provision emphasizing on tarred roads and motorized transport may be beneficial to rural communities through multiplier effects, the nature of rural travel is such that the majority of trips are principally for basic needs. Therefore, the provision of local level transport infrastructure is pertinent. For the poor people in rural areas, basic infrastructure contributes to effective service delivery as it enhances access to basic, social and economic services such as education and health as well as to productive assets such as land. One way of providing sustainable infrastructure at a local level is by involving the beneficiaries. Community participation at a local level is important in promoting and strengthening democracy and accountability as people participate in programmes related to their governance and development. The next section illustrates the “evidence from the horse’s mouth” by summarizing findings and views of rural communities who have benefited from the implementation of local level access infrastructure projects.
In
q The study to gain a better understanding of the rural travel and transport patterns
q Implementation of selected local level rural access interventions and
q Socio-economic impacts assessment of interventions implemented.
A detailed
description of the study is outside the scope of this paper, but the key
findings of the study are highlighted in
|
·
The
majority of trips (about 86%) undertaken are on short distances and
invariably within the locality ·
Motorized
vehicle ownership is very negligible (<0.5%) ·
The
weekly travel burden for a household is approximately 75 hours from which
water collection alone takes an average of 28 hours. Other main trips
undertaken were for fuelwood collection, grain processing, crop production
and marketing, education and heath. ·
Women
carry a greater amount of the transport burden (approximately 80%) and
predominantly on foot ·
Male
participation in activities such as water and firewood collection and grain
processing is higher whenever IMTs are used ·
Of
the approximately 60 tonne km per year carried by an average household, head
loading alone accounts for 54 tonne km, from which female members of the
household are responsible for 48 tonne km. ·
The household use of public
transport is confined to less frequent trips such as visits to hospitals,
visiting friends and relatives in towns and cities, sourcing of farm inputs
and crop marketing. §
By and large, the availability of conventional
transport appeared not to be an important explanatory variable for rural
travel and transport patterns. Instead, general access to services was found
to be a better variable to explain certain levels of travel and transport. Source: Adapted from
Mannock Management Consultants and ILO/ASIST for the GoZ (1997), Rural
Transport Study in Three Districts of |
The above findings clearly show that most of the trips undertaken by rural households are for basic survival needs, short, invariably on foot, and therefore off road. In light of this important finding, local level infrastructure access interventions were implemented though community participation. These included, physical access infrastructure interventions such as footbridges and footpaths and those interventions aimed at strategic location of facilities such as boreholes. The latter intervention was meant to reduce physical distance by bringing facilities and services in close proximity.
The construction of footbridges improved access to a variety of services and facilities such as schools, clinics, shops, water sources, fields and visiting friends and relatives. The following remarks provides evidence from the communities:
“Footbridges are a
necessity as the school is surrounded by rivers. During the rainy day, we
experience half attendance. When the weather becomes adverse during school
time, children will be dismissed prematurely. These problems are now a thing of
the past”. [Primary School Headmistress, Chipinge district – March 2003]
“There is no longer an
excuse for us not to come to school. As we can cross any
time. For most of the school children there is no alternative route. We
used to miss lessons when the river was flooded. As families, we also use the
footbridge to go to our fields, church and the grinding mill.” [Male
student, Panganayi secondary school].
“We are
now able to go to our fields, clinic, shops and pursue
other activities without being inconvenienced. Social relations have been
enhanced and this footbridge has changed our lives. However more footbridges
are required”. [Male
respondent, Zaka district, 2006]
The importance of footbridges in
addressing poverty is evident. In respect of education, absence from school due
to flooded rivers would mean the affected child is left behind. In turn, the
overall child’s performance is affected and this adversely affects future
employment opportunities and any prospects to earn income. Footbridges have
also enhanced access to health centers, water sources, shops, grinding mills as
well as visiting friends and relatives.
Other notable benefits from the
footbridges that the beneficiary communities have acknowledged pertain to time
savings, safety and prevention of loss of life. Before the construction of
footbridges, a lot of time was wasted through undertaking long trips to cross
at conventional bridges or looking for safer crossing points. It was also
common for parents to accompany their children to the river crossing point to
ensure that they cross safely. The time being saved following the construction
of footbridges has been released for other productive work. Although
ascertaining the magnitude of time saved and reassigned time was difficult,
communities informally implied that they were able to spend more time in their
fields, engaging in other productive activities such as gardening and brick
molding and thus earning an income.
A footpath
rehabilitated in one district involved the improvement of a 4-kilometre path
that connects a village with a number of services, which include primary and
secondary schools, a business center and a grinding mill. The improvement
entailed the clearance of verges and construction of footbridges on eleven (11)
gullies. Prior to the improvement of the
footpath, pedestrians were experiencing difficulties in crossing gullies and
bicycle and wheelbarrow users were taking a longer route to reach the desired
services. The footpath intervention was described as “an excellent project”
by the Councillor and benefits included, safer travel in a
congenial traveling environment, time savings resuling from shorter traveling
distance and ability to use intermediate modes of transport such as
wheelbarrows and bicycles.
Borehole
interventions represent a non-transport solution to a transport problem by
providing protected water sources in close proximity to communities, which in
turn minimizes the distance travelled. Significant benefits have accrued to
those communities where boreholes were constructed. These benefits include;
travel time savings, reduced health risks as communities were now drawing water
from protected sources. Prior to the construction of the borehole, 9 people from a village
that used to draw water from an unprotected water source had died. The problem
is succinctly summarized by the nurse in charge at one of the clinics in the
area:
“In September 2002, there
were 66 cases of cholera and 9 deaths occurred, 3 in the community, 3 at the
clinic and 3 at Musiso hospital. All the 9 people were living along the canal.
The cause is related to poor hygiene and the quality of water might have been a
contributory factor” [Nurse in charge, Fuve
clinic]
Girls have immensely benefited from the boreholes intervention. As one girl in one of the beneficiary village remarked:
“Before the borehole you see over there was constructed, I used to travel a very long distance to fetch water.On many occasions I would arrive at school late and tired”. [Girl respondent, Chipinge District]
The provision of the borehole in close proximity to communities has in a way empowered the girl child who can quickly fetch water and be able to reach the school in time. In addition, time saved due to proximity of water sources has according to beneficiaries, been reallocated onto other productive income generating activities such as crop production, gardening and fishing. Such interventions are clear examples of how the appropriate location and distribution of facilities and services can address transport problems.
The Transport
and the Millennium Development Goals in
Due to the nature of the majority of trips made in rural areas, which are short and sometimes in rugged terrain, there is need to focus on local level interventions which are likely to go a long way in improving accessibility and ultimately alleviate poverty as goods and services can easily be reached.
It has also been clearly evidenced that local level access interventions are likely to empower women and girls who bear the greatest travel and transport burden in rural areas. As services are brought nearer, the time taken is reduced and the saved time can be redirected to other income generating activities.
The provision of
local level transport infrastructure in
AU/ECA/ADB/WB/EU
(2005), Transport and the Millennium Development Goals in
Howe, J, (1997),
Transport for the poor or poor transport? A general review of rural
transport policy in developing countries with emphasis on low-income areas,
ILO,
Kerf, M & Smith, W. (1996) Privatising Africa’s Infrastructure: Promise and Challenge, World Bank Technical Paper No. 337
Mannock
Management Consultancy/ILO/Govt. of
Mbara, T C
(2003), Socio-economic impacts assessment of selected access interventions
implemented in Chipinge and Zaka districts of rural
Mbara, T C
(1998), The transport need generated by
agricultural activities, ILO/Government of
World Bank
(1994) The World Development Report