What are the challenges and opportunities of community-driven development (CDD) in conflict-affected countries? This paper from the World Bank reviews 13 case studies of countries affected by current or recent conflict that have specifically incorporated CDD in their development efforts. The authors find that CDD is effective in facilitating rapid implementation and cost-effective project delivery, promoting participatory models of governance, and rebuilding social capital.
CDD empowers community groups and local government by giving them control over development planning and spending. It emphasises participation and accountability, creating opportunities for the poor to gain voice and control over their own development.
This report considers thirteen case studies in depth, covering a wide variety of countries (Afghanistan, Angola, Colombia, Indonesia, Kosovo, Mindanao-Philippines, Nepal, Rwanda, Sudan, Tajikistan, Timor-Leste, Uganda, West Bank and Gaza) and forms of CDD. The cases are analysed through a framework that examines the context, policy environment, institutional environment, operational environment and community environment.
CDD is effective in addressing several key concerns in conflict-affected contexts, including the need for rapid and cost-effective project delivery, the need to promote participatory models of governance, and the need to rebuild social capital. It can also impact on:
- Context: The context of conflict allows new ‘development spaces’ to emerge. CDD can effectively introduce new ideas and practices (e.g. participation, accountability) into these spaces.
- Policy: CDD can both support and be supported by decentralisation. It provides opportunities for intensive capacity building to link communities and local government institutions.
- Institutions: CDD helps link governments and communities and promotes stability. It can provide a model of cooperation, negotiation and non-violent dispute resolution.
- Operations: CDD can provide opportunities for coordinated donor funding. It can lower project costs, even in conflict settings, and deliver results rapidly. Secure long-term funding is required, along with simple disbursement systems that will win community trust. Transparency is essential, especially regarding targeting. Simple and effective M&E are required.
- Community: CDD delivers a peace dividend to communities, and matches development investment with community preferences. It builds trust, skills and institutions, provides a platform for dialogue in conflict-affected settings, and increases self-reliance.
The authors identify 24 ‘lessons learned’. Key policy-relevant implications include:
- Design: Designing CDD programmes in conflict-affected countries requires in-depth analysis of the conflict dynamics. Effective targeting requires use of poverty diagnostics and clear selection criteria. Transparent decision-making is essential to ensure that CDD and other resource transfers do not inflame tensions.
- Accessibility: Procedures should be simplified as much as possible to enable communities to participate and take control, and to build trust.
- Coordination and Ownership: CDD interventions raise community expectations, and need to be embedded within long-term local and national government plans and budgets. It is vital to be clear about ownership and responsibility for community assets, including maintenance and recurrent costs.
- Transparency: Transparent communication is essential for effective implementation and for empowerment. It is also key to reducing elite capture and building trust and ownership.
