Suchergebnisse

In the USA local partnerships ('growth coalitions') involving leading figures from the public and private sectors date from the years after World War II. But it was not until the early 1990s that the British government recognised the potential contribution to economic regeneration of partnerships involving local authorities, Training and Enterprise Councils (TECs), and Chambers of Commerce. Then in 1994 it set up 'Government Offices' in 10 regions, giving them particular responsibility for spending on regeneration; this in turn has led to a strengthening of institutions representing both local authority and private sector interests at the regional level. A debate is now going on as to how business interests should best be represented locally: should local TECs merge with, and thereby strengthen, local Chambers of Commerce? Or as many, for example in the Labour Party, would prefer, should TECs concentrate on training and leave broader interests for economic regeneration to local authorities and chambers? Local strategies based on partnerships between business and the public sector require both parties to be well organised. The creation of effective business leadership at local and regional levels is therefore a necessary and welcome step.

SUMMARY The paper is a summary of the negotiations which led to the choice of a particularly unfortunate project in Tanzania, and a commentary of them. The project was for 'modern silos' even though economic analysis strongly suggested that the traditional bag‐stores were a cheaper form of grain storage. The fact that the project was aid‐financed enabled consultants and machinery suppliers to benefit, while the receiving government did not give the project the scrutiny it would have given to a use of local funds.RESUME Le projet des silosCet article résume les négociations qui ont abouti au choix d'un projet particulièrement malchanceux en Tanzanie et les commentent. Le projet portait sur des "silos modernes" alors que l'analyse économique suggérait clairement que l'emmagasinage traditionnel en sacs constituait un stockage meilleur marché des grains. Le fait que le projet était financé par une aide extérieure permit aux consultants et aux fournisseurs de machines d'en bénéficier et le gouvernement bénéficiaire ne contrôla pas le projet d'aussi près que s'il s'était agi de ses propres fonds.RESUMEN El proyecto de sitoEl artículo es una reseña de las negociaciones que condujeron a elegir un proyecto sumamente desafortunado en Tanzania, y un comentario sobre las mismas. El proyecto estaba relacionado con "silos modernos", aunque el análisis económico sugería de manera contundente que los almacenes tradicionales de sacos eran una forma más barata de almacenaje de cereales. El hecho de que el proyecto contase con ayuda financiera permitió beneficiarse a los consultores y los proveedores de maquinaria, en tanto que los gobiernos recipiendarios no sometieron el proyecto a un análisis tan estricto como el que se hubiera empleado en la utilización de fondos de origen local.

The years 1946–76 cover the last fifteen years of colonial rule in Tanganyika, and the first fifteen years of Independence. In that period Governments attempted a wide range of policies relating to agriculture. The more important of these are summarised in Table 1. This paper attempts to bring out the historical sequence to show how the perceived weaknesses in one set of policies led to the choice of the next. A general conclusion is that those who controlled the State consistently misunderstood fundamental aspects of peasant agriculture, and over‐estimated what the use of State power could achieve in rural development. More specifically the paper charts a conflict of interest between peasants and bureaucrats beginning in colonial times and continuing today. From a bureaucratic point of view, the peasants are an important section of the economy which they cannot fully control, but which they must attempt to manipulate to extract a surplus of food to feed the cities and export crops to extract the foreign exchange to maintain or expand the State. The peasants view the bureaucrats with mixed feelings: they know that the bureaucrats possess power — to set prices for crops or call in the police force, but they are uncomfortably aware that that power is often used to exploit their labour power.