Suchergebnisse

"Development in Practice Readers" offer a selection of articles to promote debate on a theme of current concern. Each paper has been chosen from "Development in Practice" - an international journal concerned with the social dimensions of development and relief work, with contributions from field workers, policy makers, and researchers. Each book in this series is introduced by a specially commissioned overview, and contains an annotated bibliography of current and classic titles which together constitute an essential reading list on the chosen theme. This volume brings together papers which explore people's varied expectations of development. It is introduced by Mary B Anderson, President of The Collaborative for Development Action Inc., Cambridge, USA. - Understanding differences: development and social diversity, Mary B. Anderson. Gender, development and training, Naila Kabeer. Working with street children, Tom Scanlon, Francesca Scanlon and Maria Luiza Nobre Lamarao. Older people and development: the last minority?, Mark Gorman. Culture, liberation and "development", Shubi L. Ishemo. The politics of development in longhouse communities in Sarawak, Dimbab Ngidang. What is development?, Hugo Slim. Research into local culture, Odhiambo Anacleti. An education programme for peasant women in Honduras, Rocio Tabora. Challenging gender stereotypes in training: Mozambican refugees in Malawi, Lewis B Dzimbiri. Defining local needs: a community based diagnostic survey in Ethiopia, Yezichalem Kassa and Feleke Tadele.

La reciente focalización explícita en los «grupos vulnerables» de los organismos intemacionales de asistencia —especialmente los que operan en las situaciones de emergencia en todo el mundo— denota dos importantes preocupaciones. La primera: que quienes prestan ayuda quieren poder identificar a las potenciales víctimas de desasties a fin de prever y mitigar esos acontecimientos. La segunda: que la identificación de los grupos vulnerables sirve para encauzar la asistencia —siempre restringida por la limitación de los recursos— hacia los grupos más necesitados. No obstante, habría que entender la vulnerabilidad como un concepto mucho más fuerte, en la concepción y en la aplicación de las operaciones de socorro, que un simple criterio para encauzar la asistencia. En realidad, los problemas surgen al emplear, exclusiva o preferentemente, la noción de vulnerabilidad para designar a los grupos que deben recibir ayuda.

The recent explicit focus on "vulnerable groups" by international assistance agencies — particularly those that respond to emergency situations around the world — reflects two important concerns. First, aid providers want to be able to identify potential victims of disasters in order to anticipate and mitigate such events, and second, they use the identification of vulnerable groups as a way of targeting assistance, which is always restricted by limited resources, towards those groups who most need it. However, vulnerability should be understood as a far more powerful concept in the design and implementation of aid operations than simply as a criterion for targeting aid. In fact, problems arise when the notion of vulnerability is used only or primarily to identify groups who should receive assistance.

L'attention explicite accordeée depuis peu aux «groupes vulnérables» par les organismes internationaux d'assistance — en particulier ceux qui interviennent dans les situations d'urgence partout dans le monde — reflète deux préoccupations importantes. Premièrement, ceux qui apportent leur aide veulent être en mesure de repérer les victimes potentielles de catastrophes afin d'anticiper ces événements et d'en atténuer les effets. Deuxièmement, l'identification des groupes vulnérables leur permet de concentrer l'assistance — toujours restreinte en raison des ressources limitées — sur ceux qui en ont le plus besoin. Dans l'élaboration et la mise en œuvre des opérations d'assistance, il conviendrait toutefois de considérer la vulnérabilité comme un concept beaucoup plus puissant qu'un simple critère permettant de cibler l'assistance. En fait, des problèmes se posent à partir du moment où la notion de vulnérabilité sert uniquement ou principalement à identifier des groupes susceptibles de bénéficier de cette assistance.

This working paper reflects the work and lessons learned from the Reflecting on Peace Practice Project. Over an eighteen month period, RPP conducted twenty-six case studies on a wide variety of types of peace efforts, undertaken in a range of geographical settings, in different stages of conflict, at different levels of society, and with varying forms of connectedness to local, indigenous peace efforts. These case studies were done at the invitation of the agencies involved, to capture their internal reflections on their work, as well as the views of a wide range of counterparts – participants, partnering local and international NGOs and other agencies, communities affected by the work, representatives of relevant levels of government, etc. The cases were conducted through field visits to the areas where the programs were undertaken. There were also a series of consultations bringing together more than eighty peace practitioners—both those who live in conflict situations and those who work outside their own countries. These practitioners reviewed and reflected on lessons that emerged from the cases were telling us. A number of issues emerged as central to effective peace practice but around which there remain significant differences of experience and belief. These linkages between levels in peace work, the roles and relationships between "insider" and "outsider" peace agencies, and the relationship between context analysis and strategy development. Additional areas of focus included tradeoffs between working for the reduction of violence and for social justice, dealing with deliberate disruptions of peace processes, and assessing Inadvertent negative impacts.