Who Cares About Sustainability?

Agnes Nalubiri blogging from the Rwenzori region

Tags: Africa , Uganda , Civil Society Building

Why is it so hard to sustain the effects of NGO interventions? Agnes Nalubiri explores this question working from the Rwenzori region with Hivos’ partner KRC. The emerging findings in a messy context suggest that a toxic mix of aid chain dynamics is at work.

Local and international non-government organisations working in Rwenzori region of western Uganda have increased over the years. Communities have organised into small self help groups to tap into this NGO resource because it is a requirement for some organisations, that benefits should target a small group to be effective. However, the impact and sustainability of social interventions that build up from NGO work in the region remains abstract. Most poor people have remained poor, incomes at household level have not immensely increased and resources have remained in the hands of the few well off in the community. Who then are responsible for sustaining social interventions? Why is it that NGO social interventions seem to be so unsustainable? Emerging findings suggest that the answer is to be found in the chain of relationships between donors, International NGOs , local NGOs and community.

In a focus group discussion that I conducted last week, an example was given where a Government agricultural program pays exorbitant and unsustainable allowances to their trainers, affecting similar work of local organisations which cannot afford to pay such amount to their trainers. In a similar way, some international organisations which implement activities directly at community level have continued to pay unnecessary allowances for people to participate in their activities killing innovations, and turning forums for learning into business enterprises, where people come to earn money instead of utilising the knowledge and skills acquired to transform their lives. Related to the above, various funding agencies have continued to support short term projects of 2 to 3 years which are phased out before actual results can be registered.

In addition, conditions that accompany donor grants make it difficult for local communities to engage in activities that address their immediate challenges or those they are better with/ least worst at. As a result, in order to defy the system, communities and specifically leaders have fabricated results, forged figures, and lied on the actual benefit of social interventions; this is indicative of toxic mix of aid-chain dynamics that is at work in this messy context.

Some Organisations like Kabarole Research and Resource Centre (KRC) and Sustainable Agricultural Trainer’s Network(SATNET) try to prioritisd activities that empower communities to sustain the results of social interventions. These include exposure visits, training for knowledge and skills acquisition, and ability to pass on this knowledge to others freely. Yet, their attempts are among the few exceptions that confirm the rule: In the absence of a more integrated approach that links government, NGOs and communities, the onus to sustain social intervention results is left to the community. Theirs is an uphill struggle against uncoordinated activities, duplication of work, incompetent leadership, difficulties to assess sustainability at group level, trainings offered to trainers may sometimes not trickle down, conflicts among power holders and competition between local NGOs hindering smooth and free transfer of knowledge.

For me, the first phase of my field research has validated my question. With all the energy to help the poor to get out of poverty, why is it that sustainability of the social interventions that emerge from these energies is still lacking? Who cares about ustainability? After decades of fighting rural poverty in the Rwenzori region why is it that an integrated approach is lacking, but bits and pieces of work isolated from the total fabric of the community? My quest for answers continues in the weeks to come.