The research findings on local institution-rural livelihood linkages shared in the preceding sections provide an empirical basis on which to draw the key analytical conclusions, presented below16. Together, these conclusions contribute to a better understanding of the attributes of local institutions and their interactions, weak or strong, with the livelihoods of the rural poor. As such, they can provide guidance for working constructively with local institutions to support sustainable livelihoods. In the final section these points are distilled in institution-specific policy implications and recommendations.
The case studies show that inclusive, "bonding" local institutions - based on traditional norms of solidarity and reciprocity - are key elements in household livelihood strategies and community cohesion. Together these institutions (e.g. traditional authorities, common property rights, asset-sharing arrangements, mutual assistance, informal savings and credit, etc.) ensure a minimum level of food security and a safety net for the most vulnerable groups. They govern access to communal natural resources that provide sustenance, especially for the poor and in times of crisis. They organize and finance community public works and civic-religious-cultural festivals and traditions. Their relative strength or weakness is often associated with relatively greater or lesser levels of social capital and intra-community conflict.
The evidence does not show a strong link, however, between participation in these types of bonding institutions and the achievement of higher levels of income and consumption, or social mobility. They lack the influence, resources - and rationale, in some cases - to move beyond maintaining the social order. In the Mozambique study, for instance, participation in most of the local institutions profiled was not found to be an explanatory factor in differentiating poorer and wealthier households.
Local institutions that are heterogeneous - bringing together members of different social and economic positions and influence, often with outside assistance - can be effective means for the poor to achieve some social mobility. Examples include the dairy cooperatives [and related cattle-sharing arrangements], migrant associations, watershed user committees, political parties, churches, and local governance institutions. These institutions afford an opportunity for their poorer members to gain access to information and technologies and NGO and government initiatives that they may not learn about otherwise. In the four Mozambique villages, belonging to a formal organization, such as a church or political party, is associated with greater access to outside interventions. "Being active in community affairs leads to more opportunities for getting ahead". (Mozambique Final Report)
Nevertheless, we have seen that power inequities within these bridging institutions often limit the full participation of the poorer members. For instance, the landless and marginal farmers are typically forced to accept exploitative terms with land and cattle owners to gain access to the head or two of cattle required for membership in the dairy cooperatives. Upper caste men have historically run the Gram panchayat, and corruption has kept the poor from enjoying access to government schemes designed for their benefit. This is changing in the face of two types of pressure - strong progressive national legislation and community mobilization.
Local economic institutions are typically more inclusive than formal extra-local institutions and projects that require participants, members and/or managers to have minimum levels of education and wealth (e.g. rural banks, agricultural extension and training projects, even certain anti-poverty schemes). Moreover, non-local interventions may simply bypass the poor and other marginalized groups because their needs and capacities are "invisible" to outsiders. In traditional mutual assistance and lending arrangements, trust based on social standing can substitute for financial or asset-based collateral. These arrangements have lower transaction costs and default rates, as compared with formal credit institutions, because they are based on intimate knowledge of seasonal cash requirements, individual and household capacities to repay, as well as social pressures for both lenders and borrowers to retain their good standing in the community.
The profiles show several instances where government policies have repressed traditional institutions in order to exert political authority and control over local resources. In Mozambique, from the colonial era until today, traditional authorities have been co-opted by central government to gain access to rural communities, often undermining their legitimacy with these same communities. The imposition of State Marketing Boards and dismantling of traditional market and barter mechanisms during the socialist period have left rural post-war Mozambique bereft of market institutions. The devastating slaughter of livestock during the civil war greatly undermined the traditional practice of saving in cattle and paying dowries (lobolo) in cattle.
In the Philippines, government repression of ancestral domain claims and selling off of prime forest and mineral resources to private corporations impoverished and weakened the local peoples and their institutions. More indirectly, the policies of economic liberalization in Mexico have undermined the rationale for subsistence agriculture and the economic viability of community forestry in the Oaxacan highlands. In India, farmers with access to land, water and credit are taking advantage of reduced regulations and free trade, but the poor and their institutions are largely excluded from these opportunities.
When repression of local institutions gives way to more tolerant and enabling policy environments, experience shows that many of these institutions are highly resilient17. The remarkably peaceful resettling of refugees after the civil war in Mozambique, for instance, is largely attributed to the role of traditional authorities in settling land claims and providing land access to newcomers. Now, for the first time, their legitimacy and capacity are being recognized in the National Land Law of 1997 and subsequent land reforms. In the Central African Republic, the once life-long mandate of customary village chiefs has been changed to ten years. In the Philippines, the indigenous institutions of the Cordillera - under military occupation during the 1970s and 1980s - were revitalized during the 1990s to implement new legislation recognizing their ancestral territorial claims.
Traditional institutions also appear able to adjust to changes in economic conditions in order to best represent the interests of their communities and maintain overall social order. For instance, in Oaxaca, Mexico, faced with the unstoppable out-migration of its people to the United States, local authorities are loosening traditional property rights to allow migrants to retain ownership of their land in exchange for financial contributions and other obligations. The male-dominated local governance structures - in India, Mexico and the Philippines are adjusting to pressures from above and below to allow women and youth greater participation. Provided with appropriate training, local institutions have also proved willing and able to expand their traditional roles to become full partners in local development planning and implementation.
Non-governmental organizations can play a positive role in bridging the gap between traditional local institutions and policies or programmes promoted by government and international donors. When dealing with complex resource and development issues involving multiple stakeholders, NGOs have proved useful in facilitating multi-stakeholder dialogue and collaborative processes for managing conflict and finding lasting solutions (e.g. PANCORDI, Helvetas, Lutheran World Federation). This is particularly true when local communities mistrust government because of past abuses, or the perceived political partisanship of government bureaucrats. It is also the case that many international donors prefer to channel funds through NGOs, rather than government agencies, to get around political favours and improve programme efficiency.
"The NGOs could, in a coherent and systematic way, establish partnerships and participate in the country's economic and social development. The role of NGOs would be to act as intermediaries between local institutions and international NGOs, donor agencies and government entities, and in problem cases when local associations do not know whom they should turn to." INDER Report, Mozambique
Another important role of NGOs is to provide training to different types of local institutions in the skills needed to take on new roles and responsibilities. This is particularly true in countries with strong decentralization policies and increasing devolution of authority to local levels. To complement local knowledge of resources, local institutions will need training in the modern tools of resource mapping, planning and sustainable management, to understand how to identify and market both traditional commodities and environmental services, and in financial management, among other skills. There is also the more difficult challenge of working with traditional institutions biased against certain groups to become more inclusive and democratic in terms of "who benefits" and "who makes decisions".
"To capitalise on this local strength, identified here as social capital, according to our perception, work at community level should rest on the foundations of solidarity that keep the community social order functioning at local/rural level, thus avoiding social conflicts on a greater scale than the dynamics of society itself..... contributing to the transformation of this social order from within its own walls, gradually expanding the space covered by these same walls so as to make the interior go beyond into the outside world, pick up speed, run through the world that surrounds it, reaching the state, step by step, and participating in national life" (Baptista Lundin; 1999: 13).
The central idea here is that work at community level should rest on an understanding of the local social order, and then, from inside, transform values, build capacities and expand horizons.
Resting on foundations: Great caution is warranted when introducing parallel or competing institutions that may undermine traditions of solidarity that play a major role in maintaining the social order. For example, in the case of the traditional credit and savings arrangements in Dodoma, Tanzania, projects that aimed to introduce more modern systems failed, and carried the risk of increasing the vulnerability of the poor by weakening the social norms of reciprocity and wealth redistribution. This has also been the outcome of numerous development projects in agriculture, fisheries, forestry, land titling, and health, among others, that failed to adequately consider their impacts on local institutions.
Contributing to the transformation: This is the opportunity to work with local institutions to explore, through a transparent process, the various interests in transforming the existing social order to better meet the needs and desires of different groups within society. NGOs can sometimes play a facilitating role, or change agents within the local institutions themselves. Often it is best to find common ground for action first, moving on to harder transitions later. An important area of transformation "from within" is on fundamental questions of representation and legitimacy. In implementing the National Land Law in Mozambique, the debate continues on: Who should represent local communities and on which grounds should such representation be considered legitimate?
Expanding the space: Communities and their institutions have an interest in increasing access to new technologies, markets, services and educational opportunities to improve livelihoods, social conditions and "connectedness" with the State. This requires open and prolonged dialogue about change options, and the costs and benefits for different groups within the community. NGOs can facilitate collaboration with governments and other outside institutions to expand economic opportunities and reduce local poverty.
