Poor people are generally disadvantaged when it comes to influencing policy and are poorly placed to influence the ways in which states allocate rights and resources within society. But can poor people influence pro-poor policy and what are the conditions under which this can happen?
This paper from the Overseas Development Institute addresses the above question, exploring mainstream thinking about rights, governance and development, and new thinking about accountability, civil society and the ‘new’ public management. The paper considers the role that states play in promoting and implementing redistributive policies, the ways in which social actors affect these, and ideas about the role states should play in encouraging particular forms of development. The paper offers a conceptual framework of the ‘policy process’ and a theoretical discussion of the ways in which state and non-state actors are thought to affect public policy. It considers the challenge of targeting, coordination and interface in determination and implementation of pro-poor policy.
One of the ideas about the relationship between government effectiveness and public accountability is that the devolution of formal political authority can enhance the transparency, responsiveness and accountability of government for people at the local level. Central to the challenge of pursuing and implementing effective pro-poor policy are three interrelated factors: Co-ordination, capture and ideological conviction.
Other findings of the paper are that:
- Despite their numerical supremacy, poor people are often unable to have a strong effect on public policy. However, poverty-based movements do occur, and they can affect government action
- Accountability works best when rewards depend directly on the quality of service provided; failures occur when there is no direct relationship between the two
- Governments have been encouraged to create ‘market rights’ – rights that provide the poor with an opportunity to engage in market relations – but not necessarily the benefits that markets would provide
- When voters are ill-informed about party platforms, government policies and the rights that these may provide, their ability to influence the democratic process can be limited
- Some of the conditions under which poverty-based movements can affect policy are when: Poor people overcome the challenges of limited solidarity to organise large or threatening political movements. Powerful groups may assist the poor in this process
- In addition, governments may believe that their authority to govern is dependent upon the political loyalties that arise from the redistribution of public resources
- Governments can address poverty by challenging or re-balancing enduring patterns of power and inequality. They can cooperate with beneficiaries and other non-state actors to provide or improve access to important public and collective goods.
Other suggestions of the paper are that:
- In order for decentralisation to improve effectiveness and accountability, elected bodies at local levels must have adequate funds and adequate powers
- In addition, the accountability of elected representatives to citizens, and the accountability of bureaucrats at local levels to elected representatives, should also be ensured
- NGOs and other actors can absorb some of the costs of engaging in political action, encourage poor people to engage in collective action, and transmit information about constitutional rights, potential allies and other political opportunities
- In terms of research needed, it is important to explore how civil associations affect the effectiveness and responsiveness of governments programmes, schemes and policies, and if there are alternative ways of reducing or relieving poverty
- Effective policies require that the agents who deliver the resources are able to allocate them effectively.
