Rural development: the Rehovot approach

Geoforum, Vol. Printed in Great

18, No. Britain

1, pp. 21-36,

1987

W1~7185/87$3.00+0.00 Pergamon Journals Ltd.

Rural Development: the Rehovot Approach

RAANAN

WEITZ,*

Rehovot,

Israel

Abstract: After briefly discussing the problems involved in generating rural economic development in poor countries, the Rehovot Approach to rural planning and implementation is assessed. This approach, first developed in Israel, has subsequently been refined to apply to the myriad problems of rural areas in the

diversity of countries that comprise the developing world. After discussing the basic rules in the development strategy, the need for simultaneous planning of multipurpose activities is stressed. Throughout, great emphasis is placed on integrated rural management strategies; ensuring that agricultural changes are paralleled by the development of secondary and tertiary sector activities and of appropriate social and administrative institutions. The role of ‘bottom-up’ planning systems is highlighted, as is the importance of creating organizations capable of plan implementation. This holistic approach to planning is illustrated by actual case examples.

Introduction

modernization required of the tradition-bound peasantry would be marginal and that they would provide for their own needs as far as food and raw material were concerned.

Development of rural areas in poor countries has become a major challenge to both policy makers and professionals working in the field, but agricultural growth is the weakest link in the development chain. This view was first proposed by the World Bank’s Commission of International Development (PEARSON et al., 1969) and has gained general acceptance since (BRANDT, 1980). Moreover, it is now clear that agricultural growth cannot be generated solely by direct intervention in the agricultural sector itself; it requires comprehensive or integrated development of the rural space. General acceptance of these ideas has been spurred by deep disillusionment with events in the past two or three decades. It was assumed that the benefits of development would trickle through the system and, as the economy moved toward take-off, the rural sector would be carried along by the urbanindustrial sector. It was also presumed that the

*Settlement Study Centre Rehovot 76120, Israel.

(SSC),

P.O.

Box

It appears, however, that this approach has failed. External aid was insufficient and incapable of transforming the rural area in general, and agricultural production in particular. The need to extract general development resources from rural areas alienated the exploited peasantry; and the transfer of surplus labour required for economic production was diminished to the point that it virtually disappeared (FAO, 1978; WORLD BANK, 1978). This approach to development harmed both rural and urban areas in developing countries. Local technology was smothered by borrowed foreign technology and developing nations neglected their own research capabilities, thus perpetuating their dependency. Even the most promising technological transformations produced disappointing results. The ‘green revolution’ exacerbated problems of inequality in an already unequal rural social

2355, 21

22

GeoforumiVolume

structure; overall production showed a modest increase in some areas, but rural society as a whole grew increasingly polarized (MCNAMARA, 1980; WORLD BANK, 1982).

The problem of borrowed technology is now widely recognized. Researchers at the Hammerskjold Foundation concluded that: It took two decades to build the optimistic vision of a steady developing world community depicted in the report ‘Partners in Development’ (PEARSON, 1969); it has taken barely five years for the disenchantment with the process to grow to universal proportions. It is no longer possible to defend either the past strategy of development or its all too visible results. Literature is overburdened with postmortem critiques of development history which are unanimous on the appalling results and generally candid on the causes of the failure (HAGUE et al., 1977. p. 12).

The basic admission is of continued exploitation, both internal and external, of peripheral areas by the metropolitan core (GHATAK et al., 1981). We now face an uncertain future. We know what went wrong in the past. but have no accepted understanding of what should be don+-either conceptually or methodologically-in order to achieve better results in the future. We do. however, know of a few success stories. such as Israel, Taiwan, Japan, Yugoslavia and Mainland China. which may provide us with some insights drawn from their common denominators. The Rehovot Approach to rural development was con ceived and evolved with this aim in mind. The

Rehovot

problems beginning

which

Approach confronted

derives Israeli

from

the

society

basic at the

of the 1950s as a result of the mass immigration from Afro-Asian countries. At that time whole communities were transferred to Israel from small villages and remote hamlets where their ancestors had lived for hundreds of years. They brought with them the traditional way of life and tribal patterns molded by a subsistence farming economy. Israeli ‘old timers’, most of whom hailed from Europe, tried to solve the settlement problems of the newcomers by applying approaches that had been tried and found successful in Israel: the kibbutz, the moshav and the collective moshav communities. However, it quickly became apparent that past experience was inadequate (WEITZ and ROKACH, 1968).

18 Number

111987

In 1955, an innovative planning and implementation model was devised for the Lakhish Region, and ten years later it was quite clear that the regional approach applied in this area was indeed a success. Thus, a new way for solving the basic economic, social and civic problems of a rural traditional population had started to evolve. As the impact of the Lakhish regional plan unfolded, the methods involved were applied to other rural regions in Israel, re-orientating the whole structure of rural development at the national, regional and local levels. In 1963 the Settlement Study Centre was established in Rehovot, Israel. with the specific aim of trying to distinguish between phenomena which arc uniquely Israeli and those that could be applied to other countries. Based on practical experience in Israel and on pilot projects in various countries. a group of professionals began to develop an approach which could be. and has been, generally applied to developing countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America. At the same time an extensive research project was launched by the Twentieth Century Fund to investigate problems of rural development (WEITZ, 1971~). In the decade that followed the practical methodology was developed and relined and the strategy streamlined, enabling the Rehovot Approach to cope with the myriad problems of rural areas in the diversity of countries that comprise the developing world (WEITZ. 1979, 1986).

Basic Rules of Strategy The Rehovot Approach is based on a clearly defined strategy and planning methodology which details the sequence of activities leading to implcmentation. While details of methods and structures of plans and execution vary from place to place according to the specific conditions prevailing in each. the overall approach may be applied to all countries in which the agricultural sector is the main economic sector, both in volume and in efficiency. The proposed strategy is founded on three assumptions: that agricultural growth is the key to rural development; that the development of agriculture requires the concomitant development of the secondary and tertiary sectors; and that social forces play an important role in agricultural development. The latter is of the utmost importance, since agricultural

23

GeoforumNolume 18 Number l/1987 production results from the efforts of a multitude of individual producers whose willingness and ability to participate in any programme of change is crucial.

population. Agricultural transformation is essential for any country striving to come out of subsistence; economic growth is, therefore, the lever to rural development.

These assumptions were translated into three major aims for rural development:

One of the most important issues involved in rural development programmes concerns the ownership and management of farm units. Policy makers and planners must make a choice between two basic patterns of farm organization: the family farm, in which almost all labour requirements-from fieldwork to management-are met by the farm family itself; and the managed farm, in which management is separated from other types of labour, and which utilizes more labour than the family can provide. In the latter we include commercial estates or plantations employing many hired labourers; small private farms employing a few hired hands; various kinds of government farms; and collective farms, such as the kolhoz in the U.S.S.R., the ejido in Mexico, the kibbutz and collective moshav in Israel.

1.

2.

3.

To create sources of income in rural areas by generating new employment oppo~unities. The success of this goal clearly depends on the economic and natural resources of the region, but the proposed approach helps ensure both the optimal use of available resources and the optimal distribution of the resultant income, subject to the constraint of providing a minimum income for the local population. To develop an efficient system of economic, social and civic services that the region will be able to support and operate. To generate a large number of employment opportunities that will accommodate the increasing population within the rural areas and obviate a flight to the cities. By reducing geographical mobility it may be possible to preserve society’s traditional kinship patterns and community life, and to check the overconcentration of population in large urban centres, which endangers their very existence.

To achieve these three aims, six basic rules have been devised to define the broad strategy of policy within the conceptual framework of our approach to integrated rural development (IRD); these are discussed in some detail below. 1. Agricultural growth is and must remain gradual

Farm development advances from subsistence to a market-oriented economy through three welldefined stages: diversification, specialization and automation. The most important characteristics of the agricultural production unit (farm) at each stage of development are summarized in Table 1. Rural development programmes must take into account the inevitability of the gradual transformation of the farm unit. 2. Agricultural social factors

growth depends

OJZ

economic

In most cases, farm structure is determined on the basis of economic considerations, but the pattern of ownership is also a strong social force and has a direct effect on the motivation of the farming population. There is enough evidence to indicate that, in general, peasants strive to operate their own farm. The fellah in the Middle East, the campesino in South America, the coolie in South-East Asiaall want a farm of their own and regard it as the fulfillment of their most cherished aspirations. This commonly shared desire for a private holding derives both from deep-rooted social, psychological and economic motives, and from current conditions prevailing in developing countries. In most contemporary and traditional societies, land ownership is a source of economic and political power as well as social status, and is recognized as such by all members of the society. The landless labourer, who depends on his landlord for subsistence, sees his own farm as the only way to achieve economic independence, security and social status, which he cherishes no less than the hope of improving his economic circumstances. By providing the labourer with a family farm we can, therefore, motivate him to participate in the development effect.

and

3. The supporting system-a

prerequisite

for agri-

cultural development

Rural development can be accomplished only when based on economic growth, which is impossible without an effective and profitable deployment of manpower and capital resources by the rural

The growth and development of the agricultural sector are determined by the support system, which includes economic, social and municipal services, as

GeoforumiVolume

24 Table 1. Main characteristics

of the farm-unit

at four development

Subsistence GNP 130-450

Characteristics

Diversified GNP 65&2800

stages (in U.S.S-4, Specialized GNP 280&5000

18 Number l/1987 1975) Automated GNP <6500

Farm structures by branches

Mainly staple crops*

Field crops and livestock

One main branch One branch with some auxiliary branches

Production

Predominantly home consumption

Direct marketing; some processing; home consumption

Direct marketing; processing

destination

Output value Value added/output Investment

Mainly processing

30~1000

200&6000

lO,OOO-30,000

Over 50,000

90-60

5WO

35-25

Depending on farm type

2-6

15-35

5&85

(%)

per one work day

350-500

Technological level, nature of technology Added value/work day

Pre-Newtonian

Farmer’s professional

Traditional and specialized Seasonal; inbuilt underemployment

Medium but varied

Specialized

Highly specialized

Balanced

Depends on farm type

Mostly seasonal (leisure)

skill

Labour schedule

Intermediate

Highly specialized 15-30

5-15

Automated and computerized <35

Dependence organization

upon community

Insignificant

Complete

Partial

Insignificant

Dependence system

upon supporting

Insignificant

Partial

Complete

Essential

*Excluding cases of subsistence

plantations.

well as facilities for handling and processing agricultural produce. The support system consists of three principal elements: the physical infrastructure and facilities required for its operation; the institutional structure adapted to local conditions; and the availability of skilled motivated manpower. In the early stages of development, with which IRD is concerned, the operation of services is often hampered by limitations inherent in the system: low output of agriculture, low level of technical ability, absence of an infrastructure network, scarcity of capital, and-above all-an acute shortage of manpower. At this critical stage, the support system has to meet three fundamental requirements: accessibility to service facilities, efficiency in terms of economies of scale, and spatial concentration in specific locations. The first requirement is maximum territorial dispersal of service facilities in order to reach a large number of small producers, scattered over a wide

area with little or no transportation facilities. Accessibility to the services is essential in order to compete successfully with the more expensive and less effective traditional service suppliers, usually found in or near the village. The term ‘accessibility’ applies to the distance and time required to reach the service facility, as well as to the method of dispensing the service. The second requirement is that services be efficient in terms of price and quality. Efficiency is a function of scale. For each service facility there is a minimum level below which it cannot operate effectively. The larger the population base and the volume of goods it handles, the more efficient the service is likely to be. The scale of operation, however, remains limited by the amount of capital that is available for developing the support system, and by the ability and willingness of clients to pay for the services. The third requirement is that services which function on a similar scale be located in a single place

GeoformdVolume

18

25

Number 111987

(PRION, 1968). The advantages are manifold: concentration of services is especially important in areas where transportation is inadequate; infrastructure costs are reduced as roads and other installations serve a number of facilities; the proximity of various services facilitates cooperation and may attract skilled personnel.

4. Organization by and for the farmers Organization of agricultural producers is a precondition to the transformation of the sector. The transition from traditional subsistence farming to diversified commercial farming requires adequate organizational structures to maintain the interrelations between individual producers and the supporting system. Such organizations can help the peasant to adapt to the necessary changes occurring both in the individual farm unit and in the rural community more generally. These organizations can be initiated locally or enforced by government law (WEST, 1974; ARNON, 1981). Most development programmes designed for rural areas prescribe the cooperative as the main instrument for the transformation, renewal and expansion of existing support systems. There is, however, a great deal of confusion with regard to the nature and functions of cooperatives. Cooperatives may be divided into two distinct groups, each with entirely different objectives and functions: multi-purpose cooperatives which operate on the village level only; and single-purpose cooperatives which operate outside the village. The farmer in developing countries has not yet mastered the services necessary for the transformation of his farm, mainly because he lacks the skill, the means and the power to meet the intermediaries on an equal footing. For that reason, operators of services do not compete with each other but enforce their own terms on producers. Instead of serving the farmer they often exploit him. Farmers should, therefore, join forces in creating an organization which will be capable of confronting the intermediaries by virtue of its strength and volume of operations. Such an organization is the village cooperative. Cooperatives outside the village are not necessarily better or worse for the farmer than any other service supplier, private or public. They should be judged in each case on their merits (ECKSTEIN, 1966; MOTOOKA, 1967; BUSE and HELEMBERGER, 1968).

5. Industrialization is a must for rural development

Agricultural growth and rural development depend on industrialization for the production of inputs; for the processing of a growing share of the agricultural produce and the absorption of raw materials from agriculture; for additional employment opportunities; and for an increase in local demand for agricultural products, especially perishable foods. As yet, industrialization has not produced such results in developing countries mainly because it has been modelled on the process that developed nations underwent some time ago (UNITED NATIONS, 1964). Inadequate introduction of sophisticated capital-intensive and labour-short industrial enterprises into the developing world succeeded only in creating the undesirable modern phenomenon of ‘dualism’. For industrialization to be successful, industry must be adapted to the conditions prevailing in the specific region, following three basic rules: (a)

(b)

(c)

‘Parallelism-which determines the technological level of industrial enterprises to be used in rural areas. This level is one of the most important factors determining the economic results of multisectoral development projects. It is affected by the level in other sectors as they relate to the general economic conditions and to the specific conditions in the particular region. ‘Compatibility’-which denotes the adequate reciprocal exchange of specific inputs and outputs in every stage of the planned growth of industry, agriculture and services. A general framework of input-output relationships determined on the national level is inadequate to achieve optimal results in a particular rural region. Planning for industrialization should therefore be compatible with the conditions prevailing in other sectors of the region. ‘Location’-which is the placing of various industrial enterprises vis-ci-vis non-industrial activities and each other. Location is of prime importance and should be considered both from the viewpoint of industrial requirements and of the general distribution of activities, as determined by the physical spatial planning.

These three rules are necessary to determine the profiles of the most adequate industrial enterprises for each locality (THIEME, 1963; UNIDO, 1980).

GeoforumiVolume

26 6. Urbunization

as N f‘uctor

in

promoting

rum!

development

Developing countries cannot and should not cop? the patterns of population distribution in developed countries. Not only arc such patterns inappropriate for their economic development but cvcn in cievelopcd countries doubts have arisen about their suitability for the needs of societ!,. What is needed i\ a new approach to urban-rural relationships. enhancing urban decentraliz~rtion. This can IX achieved bv ;I hvstem of rural towns bascci on ;: hierarchy (if iul;ctiona (KIVKlN, 1%X,: 1;NIDG. IY7X). Kural towns assume three main functions ot development in developing countries: (a)

(h)

(c)

‘l‘he! provide ;I busi\ for activating the motc the transition from ;I clo~cd economic structure to the production of Increasing \,arietica and quantities ot good5 for the market. The I-rquired support \er\,iccs include entrepreneurs and profcsGcm:rl workcrs (411~3 a!, teacher\. doctors. cnyinccr-\. technicians. planners. extension workers. etc.) but such people arc usually unwilling to Ii\, II? villages or in inter-village ccntrc4: the\ - prefer 1 an urban centre where the! can find acccpable scrvIccs and amenities. l‘he! can serve a\ an appropriate location for the development of industries that mus! bc dispersed in the rural regions. They can mtroducc new cultural values to the countryside and hasten the process of modernization. The proximity of the town provides the farmer with enhanced prospects: produce markets, better services and alternative sources of employment. Those who leave their farms are able to maintain contact with their home villages because the rural town is located in the countryside: indeed in certain cases. they can even live in the village and work in the town.

‘These rules only define a strategic framework; ;I concrete planning methodology is now required to translate them into practical proJects for implementation. Simultaneous ties

Planning of Multi-purpose

Activi-

Integrated rural development (in terms of the Rehovot Approach) is a programme to ensure the simultaneous planning of multi-purpose activities. These activities operate on the macro and micro

IX Number

l/I%37

Icvels; they involve the three economic sectors: and they take into account the economic. social. spatial and organizational aspects of the development process. ‘Simultaneous’ refer\ to the coordinated planning of these activities in space and time. It i> self-evident that the implementation of these plans can only i)c done step-by-step through prescribed in iin ol-der clctcrmintid IX the generai stages. t‘ramcwork ot the plan (U’EII‘Z. lc~~L~~.

I>e\~eiopmcnt plannin g conccpt4 and methods used in tlc\eioping countries during the last three decades mostly operated on the macro Ic~ei 01 were--as the\, arc being called non----‘top-tioM:n’ approachc\. ?helr lailure has r-ecenti) pushed revisionists to take ;L completeI\ antagonistic stand and give allcgiancc to micro-lc\cl plannin,? method\ (LAKASHMANAN. IYXI), the ‘bottom-up’ approach III the Third b’orld ihangc\ relate to ii towards the poor h\ the villapc becoming and B change in the

countries the critical \tructur:ti shift of decision-making power initiating a 'Imttom-up‘ proctv: the toal point of tlevAopnent, education system redirecting it

towards raising mass consciouxnesh :rnd rerr~ode~ng elites (WIGNAKA.IA. 1077. I>. 11). Past experience has shown a lack of consistenq between aims defined on the national level and the actual needs of the individual. The mechanism of free market and price system which is presumed to act as a coordinating mechanism cannot create :: balance without grave social repercussions. which are economically detrimental. t\ suitable method ot planning is. thercforc. required that can integrate the macro- and micro-planning scales and implcmcnt the results, Thi\ approach can be applied at the intermediate ot- regional le\,cl only. but the planner must be a~vare of the overall national poliq for development and the imposed constraints. and have first-hand knowledge of all the factors operating on the local level. Intrr-sec~toral

irltcgrrttion

The generally accepted method of planning deals with each of the economic sectors or their related sub-sectors separately in a vertical manner. A study conducted for the International Labour Office showed clearly that inter-scctoral integration at a level as near as possible to the field is one of the most important factors (WEITZ P[ rrl.. lY78). It is analysis of the linkage only through a careful

Geoforum/Volume

18 Number 111987

between the three sectors under conditions prevailing in each locality that the maximum multiplier effect can be obtained. Similarly, it is only through the simultaneous planning of the three sectors that employment can be doubled, and sometimes tripled, as compared with development projects drawn for each of the sectors separately. Inter-relationship

of the four basic aspects

The third facet of simultaneity is the capability of a plan to deal concurrently with the four basic aspects of development: economic, social, spatial and organizational. It is now universally accepted that human and institutional factors assume prime importance in rural development in developing countries (WATERSON, 1965; EISENSTADT, 1961; HAGEN, 1968). The approach must also be capable of circumventing the limitations inherent in the analytical tools of planning: the static character of the analytical models and the many relevant factors neglected in the models. Unfortunately, they typically deal with only one or two aspects involved in the process of development and none have yet been produced capable of dealing with all four aspects. Any practical planning approach must be able to cope with some of the basic requirements of the environment in which it operates, and to identify factors affecting the development process and operating within it. Planners should be concerned with the possible effects of changes in all factors and understand their role in development. This implies that an adequate planning method must be sufficiently flexible to accommodate the quantitative or qualitative factors and the inter-related factors that are perceived in the course of implementation. The nature and number of factors that affect a development plan and their interdependency comprise an awesome complex which crosses disciplinary lines, reaches beyond the quantifiable and demands teamwork to fathom and establish the relationship with practical problems at hand. For this reason, any plan which aims at changing the existing situation in rural areas of the Third World must be carried out by an interdisciplinary professional team that can cope simultaneously with all four aspects of development.

Planning

The above

as a Cross-function

prerequisites

impose

planning

demands

which can only be met through adequate methodology. We suggest a ‘cross-function’ method, namely a merger of two planning activities-vertical and horizontal-at the regional level (Figure 1). The vertical function is the coordination of microand macro-planning within the intermediate regional spatial framework. Such coordination is usually the result of trial and error, pursuant to a dialogue between the local, regional and national levels. Micro-planning deals with individual units of production; it aims to secure the greatest possible benefits for them and is intimately linked to human behaviour and social factors that do not always lend themselves to quantitative expression. Macroplanning is not-nor can it be-an arithmetic sum of the results of micro-planning. Experience has shown that goals and projects determined at the level of macro-planning seldom accord with circumstances prevailing at the micro-economic level. Classical theory expects perfectly competitive, freemarket mechanisms to direct the behaviour of firms according to the projections computed from macroeconomic analyses. Yet macro- and micro-planning tend to lack a common denominator due to differences in the immobility of production factors, differences in technological levels between regions and the absence of an overall framework for evaluating behaviour patterns in less developed

The

cross-

functlo”

concept

:

u

I

GeoforumiVolume

28 countries. The integration of macro- and microplanning must be the objective of regional planning. The horizontul function embraces a wide range of activities: inter-sectoral coordination; physical plans and the translation of a general development plan into concrete implementation projects. Integrated development results from a system of relationships between agriculture, industry and services, within a specific spatial framework. These relationships are dependent on existing resources and their exploitation, the stage of economic development and physiographic features. Plans to increase agricultural production, for instance, require service facilities, industrial enterprises and the development of urban markets and transportation networks. The development plans of each economic sector must therefore be coordinated. The ‘region’ is the space in which cross-function is implemented. Its scope and boundaries, however. may change in the course of time and be redetermined at every stage of development. In general, it can be said that, at the earlier stages of growth, implementation of development programmes requires direct personal contact between planners and the local farming population. Planning regions will. therefore. tend to be small. At larger stages, as the local population undertakes an increasing number of functions, the level of detail in the development programmes lessens and the size of the region grows. When regional planning is regarded as a cross-function, the intermediate or regional level can be clearly defined. Rural space should, thercfore, be subdivided into regions large enough to constitute a definite unit within the national development programme, and to permit implementation of the three simultaneous planning programmes described above. The region should then be divided into sub-regions or ‘areas’, which are the spatial units within which the development of agriculture and its associated activities occur. The delineation of areas within a region is determined both by ecology and by existing administrative frameworks, which may enhance integrated development of agricultural growth. The proposed approach is intended for the intermediate or regional level. A ‘region’ consists of the various ‘areas’ and includes the towns and villages of the hinterland. Since planners must work with existing organizations, structures and subdivisions, ‘regions’ are delineated along existing organizational frameworks. The boundaries of a ‘region’

may, therefore, provinces.

Planning

coincide

Methods

with

18

those

Number l/1987 of states

or

and Procedures

The cross-function concept has been applied by teams from the Settlement Study Centre in many development regions, and has gradually evolved into a concrete planning methodology which can be divided into five phases (see Figure 2). In the first phase planners study the region and delineate its areas by means of data collection and surveys of the physical, ecological, social, organizational and economic aspects. The second phase involves the first approximation of the region’s macro-plan, within which the objectives and constraints of the region as one functional unit are quantitatively formulated. This phase is usually known as ‘planning from above’, and must be coordinated with national objectives and constraints. The third phuse involves the micro-planning for agriculture, industry and services. Agricultural development planning is based on the farm-type methodology; industry is derived from the microplanning of industrial enterprises based on profiles of possible and necessary industries; the service sector is planned according to scale and accessibility prevailing in the region. The aggregate results of the indicators of the three sectors planned ‘from below’ should coincide quantitatively with the parameters which were calculated for the region by macroplanning. In practice this rarely happens. In order to arrive at the same results ‘from below’ and ‘from technique was developed by above’, an iterative means of which the macro-plan and the sectoral and micro-plan are recalculated and adjusted until the common denominator is reached. In the fourth phusr the economic and social programmes are translated into spatial distribution. and physical plans on the regional areas and community levels. A detailed plan is constructed, in which the location and hierarchy of the various functions and their linkages are determined according to local conditions and the relations between region and country are accounted for. In the fifth phase concrete projects for implementation are prepared, as well as the institutional and

I I

I

’ I I

I

I 1

I

I

/ I

,

I

I

I

I

I

I

:

Figure

2.

Plan of rettlement

Plan of SettlemCnt WV B

Plan 0, settlemcnt typec

Geoforum/Volume

31

18 Number l/1987

organizational set up needed detailed planning of the various for the region is now ready.

to carry out the projects. The plan

Experience has shown that the Rehovot Approach is one of the most effective methodologies available for integrated development. Some idea of its practical value can be obtained by considering Table 2. This summarizes the main elements in a comprehensive ten-year plan prepared in 1964 for one of the then less developed regions of Greecethe island of Crete; it also provides information of the actual development situation which pertained in 1975 and compares this with the plan. The plan, which assumed a virtually static population given the continuation of out migration, was based on: increased agricultural productivity through reduced farm fragmentation; improved water availability and greater in-farm efficiency; linked industrial development to include the processing of fresh farm produce and the production of agricultural inputs; an increased role for the service sector (including tourism) and the need to improve infrastructure provision, with the concentration of services in regional centres. Throughout, the need to anticipate changes in social structure was incorporated into the plan. As the table demonstrates the general trend of development in Crete broadly accorded to the plan, although the rate of development was Table 2. Indicators

much higher than anticipated in all three sectors. The average per capita income went up more than four-fold during the period 1963-1975 as compared with the expected two-fold increase. The highest rate of development (much higher than planned) was achieved in the services sector, mainly due to the accelerated development of tourism; as a result, the share of the industrial sector in the gross product was lower than planned despite the fact that in absolute terms the industrial product increased almost four-fold. The Computerized

Total population Total employment (labour force) in Agriculture (%) in Industry (%) in Services (%) Unemployed (%) Structure of GDP (constant prices): in Agriculture (%) in Industry (%) in Services (%) GDP of Crete (index constant prices) GDP of Agriculture (index constant prices) GDP of Industry (index constant prices) GDP of Services (index constant prices) Per capita income (index)

System

Inevitably, given the complexity of the phenomena with which it deals, the Rehovot Approach entails a demanding and painstaking methodology. Accordingly in 1984 the SSC proposed that a computerized system be developed to expedite the planning and presentation of regional development projects and to facilitate the training of planners in the approach. The proposal was approved by the SSC Board of Trustees and IBM Computer Research Unit, and an agreement for a three-year programme was signed. The product of the first stage of the programme, namely the compilation of software for macro-regional planning, has been applied in the field in Kenya, Costa Rica and Andalusia (Spain).

of development

Indicator

Rehovot

1963

for Crete

Plan for 1975

Situation in 1975 (results)

483,000 488,000 218,000 213,000 70.2 52.7 11.0 19.7 25.3 15.6 3.2 2.3

480,000 194,000 56.2 18.0 24.2 1.6

52.0 19.2 28.8 100

40.5 27.4 32.1 202

40.6 19.5 39.9 340

100 100 100 100

161 268 225 200

280 385 600 440

Sources: For 1963 and Plan for 1975: Crete Development

Plan 19651975,

Vol. I, Agrideve, April 1955. For the situation in 1975: Centre of Planning and Economic Research (KEPE); National Statistical Service of Greece; Ministry of National Economy, Department of National Accounts.

32

GeoforumiVolume

The computerized man/machine system is called the ‘Rehovot System’ and will overcome the shortcomings of the present manual methodology. In fact it Will have the following advantages: -_

(4 (b) Cc)

(4

(e)

(f)

It reduces rather dramatically the time needed for regional planning; it makes it possible to elaborate and present in full detail several alternatives for the regional plan: it enables continuous modification of the plan throughout implementation and allows the introduction of necessary adaptations to the evolving realities in the region. Thus the computerized system creates a new capability for continuous dynamic planning: it presents the detailed plan in easily understandable graphs and diagrams, while also being capable of producing a full print-out of all the alternatives; it facilitates the training of local manpower to handle the procedures of regional planning; and it opens up new opportunities of simultaneous, multi-regional plans which could be aggregated into the national development plan.

Local Participation lization

and Government

Decentra-

Development is the end product of a multitude of activities initiated by individuals voluntarily using their private means (‘private actions’), and by governments using public means through legal enforcement (‘government actions’). Private and government actions are the only two motivating forces that push the economic system into activity (COLM and GEIZER, 1967; WEITZ, 1986) and no growth is possible without a proper harnessing of the two. This is true for each and every stage of economic growth. The question is: are these two driving forces to be harnessed and used in the same way, in the same proportions and in the same intensity in all situations? Unfortunately, there is no general answer to this basic problem. Those who adopt the capitalistic theories maintain that individual freedom of action leads to maximization of economic benefits in society. Those who adhere to socialistic theories maintain that in order to reach the goals of maximum utilization of economic resources, the government should assume full responsibility for the economic activities of the

18 Number

111987

country in all situations. Both theories have proved to be inefficient in practice and have not fulfilled the expectations of their protagonists. The two theories do not allow for variations in human or natural conditions nor do they concede that different individuals and societies behave differently in different situations. However, there is another possibility, and one proved by experience: for each particular situation different proportions of private initiative and government intervention are required to induce the best use of resources. This ratio is the ‘optimal-mix’ for each specific case. Such ratios are not accidental or random, and there is a general method which can be employed to establish the values of the ‘optical mix’ for the two forces which drive the economyinvestments and organizational patterns. The term ‘investment’ in this context should be understood broadly as including all labour and capital inputs designed to stimulate economic growth. The planning strategy and methods developed by the Rehovot Approach provide clear indications of the ‘optimal mix’ in each region, but planning is not enough. Local participation and government decentralization are needed to transform the proposed approach into a practical tool for rural development. Since the integrated approach involves changes in social structure and lifestyles, the active participation of the local population in planning and in implementation is crucial to ensure the maximum possible mobilization of local resources. both human and natural. Other changes can then be expected to follow as new economic opportunities open up. It is especially important to introduce specific measures that evoke strong personal so as to bring about the necessary responses, changes from within. Too many programmes have faltered because they were imposed on the people from outside and have failed to win their cooperation and support. _4 development programme can succeed only if it is designed for the people and with the people, and takes into account their desires, aspirations and values. It is often claimed that rural development programmes in developing countries are doomed to failure because the peasant will resist innovations that interfere with commonly accepted practices and procedures (ALERS-MONTAULO, 1960; MOTOOKA, 1967; KAHL, 1969; WEINTRAUB, 1981). Those who uphold this view believe that such attitudes derive from an inherent contradiction

GeoforumNolume 18 Number l/1987 between the social norms of traditional societies and the readiness to accept change. This explanation is, at the very least, rather simplistic. Nevertheless, it has served in many instances as an excuse for those who have failed to achieve positive results in development activities. The history of rural development in developing countries, short as it is, abounds with examples of acceptance and successful adjustment to proposed changes and innovations. Despite the evidence, the myth of resistance is still very popular, and is often accompanied by a feeling of superiority and disdain for the uneducated, but supposedly content, peasant (ERAMUS, 1961). In the search for effective measures to promote development, policy makers and planners have often tended to emphasize the economic aspects of development, while little attention has been paid to social considerations in general, and the population’s participation in particular. In recent years, however, the important role played by social forces in the development process has been gaining recognition by an increasing number of people involved in development activities (ADELMAN, 1977; GALJART and BUIJS, 1982). After coming into closer contact with the population, many development workers have learnt that social institutions, customs and traditions exert a powerful influence. While this is true in any society, the traditional society is especially affected by such influences, ‘primarily because its social institutions date back many generations and, consequently, are deeply rooted in the consciousness of the people (PAPENEK, 1967; POTTER, 1971). The term ‘social planning’ is commonly used to denote the planning of social services, namely services which contribute to the improvement of living conditions and social advancement of the populace. Under this heading are included nutrition, health, education and, occasionally, housing. In this sense, ‘social’ planning actually constitutes the planning of certain activities included in the tertiary sector of the economy, i.e. the service sector. It is, in fact, nothing but a branch of economic planning. We conceive the term ‘social planning’ to have an entirely different meaning. It is defined as a complex of principles and methods of planning designed to utilize social forces to attain development goals. The aim of social planning is to provide policy makers, planners and implementers with guidelines for dealing with the people for whom the development programmes are designed,

33 and to help them establish a relationship of mutual understanding and cooperation. After studying development for the last three decades, one cannot escape the conclusion that the form of political regime and its ideology have no relationship to the results of development programmes. Thus, we find successful projects both in democratic countries, like West Germany and Japan, and under dictatorial regimes, like Taiwan and Yugoslavia. The crucial factor is, therefore, not the regime but rather governmental organization and institutional arrangements. It is now clear that there are general rules of governmental organization which can aid development planners and policy makers to achieve success in development programmes. On the whole, it appears that as society climbs the ladder of economic growth, the importance of voluntary institutions increases, while the emphasis on government activities moves from lower to higher levels of organization. In the initial growth stage, the main administrative and financial effort must be concentrated in the periphery, and government intervention should be felt most at the regional level. However, for historical reasons, governmental organization in most countries is centralized. Decision making and control over implementation are concentrated in the capital, usually in the hands of people not acquainted with the conditions prevailing in the countryside. Most important, no real coordination exists between the various branches of the central government. Each ministry acts independently, along a vertical chain of command (KATZ et al., 1978). Since it is obviously impossible to introduce development systems of the kind we have described without coordination, many countries have come to feel that the achievement of their development aims depends upon the establishment of a central planning agency, which coordinates the activities of other governmental agencies. A central planning authority of this kind, however, usually acts at the national level only, and has no powers of implementation at the regional and local levels, where it is most needed. Since the organizational structure of government agencies is strictly vertical, matters of regional or local importance requiring inter-agency negotiations are often referred to administrative agencies in the national capital. Suggestions and ideas originating in the field have to climb up the ladder within each ministry until they

Geoforum/Volume 18 Number 111987

34 the top. Even then it is most difficult to find the necessary tools for evaluation and coordination between the ministries. The result is a bureaucratic set-up that hinders the success of development programmes. reach

To overcome the difficulties that arise from the conflict between the needs of development and the usual structure of government administration, many governments have begun looking for alternative organizational patterns. Some of the solutions lead to the establishment of special authorities for development at the intermediate or regional level, as for example in the Tennessee Valley development project and the Gal-Dya development in Ceylon (WATERSON. 1965; GAL-OYA DEVELOPMENT BOARD, 1964; KATZ et ul., 1978). The manner in which a regional authority is established determines to a considerable extent its relations with government agencies operating in the field and with various forms of local government. The regional authority can originate in two ways, from above and from below. Establishment from above involves the creation of a new ~~rgani~ati~)n with full control over all functions and facilities connected with the development plan. When the regional authority originates from below, agencies already established in the area are granted planning and development coordination powers, although when necessary, new administrative units may be added. The simplest and most common method is the use of district organizations already operating in the held. However, the approach most likely to achieve particular development aims can only be decided upon after careful examination of all the factors in a specific situation. It should be stressed that in most cases the prerequisites of local participation and government decentralization are not met. This is probably the most difficult obstacle to the application of our approach. Considering the efforts exerted during the last thirty years in Third World countries and the disappointing results thus far achieved, we firmly believe that our approach is an effective tool, if not the only one, for solving the pressing problems of rural areas. We maintain that in cases where the prerequisites of the development plan cannot all be met, no practical and operable alternatives exist. This statement may sound rather discouraging, but a situation cannot be changed by good intentions. The proposed approach is conditioned by different prerequisites, whether we like it or not.

Conclusions

In brief, we say that integrated rural development, according to the Rehovot Approach, operates within the context of the total rural population and places special emphasis on poverty eradication. It is actiorz oriented in the sense that it formulates projects that are adjusted to the conditions prevailing in each particular area. It is coordinated in the sense that it coordinates policy, investment and manpower programming between the local and the regional level on the one hand, and the objectives and constraints at the national level on the other. It is comprehensive in the sense that it takes into account all the relevant sectors of the economy in the rural space and uses the inter-relationships to identify and exploit the linkages and the external effects within each. It is also democratic in the sense that it insists on active local participation. The pressure of rural masses in the poor countries is growing steadily and finds expression in political terms. Unless the rural population understands and accepts the promise of development plans and believes that the necessary means to solve the basic problems are being adopted by policy makers, governments will find themselves overturned, no matter how strong they deem themselves. The recent example of Iran-to cite only one casespeaks for itself. This is why the author believes that the proposed approach has the potential of becoming a powerful, practical and proficient tool for whoever is ready to use it. The only essential condition required for using it is an awareness and understanding of the situation which exists in rural areas of the poor countries. The rural situation is intolerable and must be changed without delay, but such change cannot be easily achieved nor can shortcuts be taken. It demands that policy makers not only understand the issues and genuinely desire change, but also that they adopt resolute and determined policies for rural development capable of overcoming the entrenched interests of powerful groups whenever necessary.

Note 1.

Reports have been prepared for countries as diverse as Crete. Iran, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Ecuador, Peru, Chile, Mexico. Guatemala, Venezuela. Colombia, Brasil. See for example: PELLEY et al. (1983) Planning Project: Zornba and Machinga Districts,

Geoforum/Volume

18 Number l/1987

Malawi. Settlement Study Centre, Rehovot. PRION et al. (1984) Proyecto de Planificacion de1 Desarrollo Rural Integrado de la Region de Bolivar, Republica de1 Ecuador, Settlement Study Centre, Rehovot. PRION et al. (1984) Proyecto de Planificacion de1 Desarrollo Rural Integrado de la Region Calvo-Siles, Republica de Bolivia, Settlement Study Centre,

Rehovot.

References I. (1977) Redistribution Before Growth. A Strategy for Development Countries. ISS Paper, The

ADELMAN,

Hague. ALERS-MONTAVLO, M. (1960) Social systems analysis of supervised agricultural credit in Andean community, Rur. Social., XXV, No. 1. ARNON, I. (1981) Modernization of Agriculture in Developing Countries. John Wiley, Chichester, U.K. BRANDT, W. (1980) North-South: A Programme of Survival. Pan Books, London. BUSE, R. C. and HELMBERGER, P. (1968) Rural cooperatives, Dev. Dig., VI, 33-35. COLM, G and GEIZER, TH. (1967) Public planning and private decision making in economic and social development. In: The Challenge of Development, J. Ward (Ed.). Aldine, Chicago. ECKSTEIN, S. (1966) El Ejido Colectivo en Mexico. Fondo de Cultura Economica, Mexico City. EISENSTADT, S. N. (1961) Essays on Sociological Aspects of Economic and Political Development. The Hague. ERAMUS, C. (1961) Man Takes Control: Cultural Development and American Aid. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN. FlLLOL, TH. Social Factors in Economic Development, the Argentine Case. Cambridge, MA. FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION (FAO) (1978) Report on the FAOISIDAIDSE InterRegional Symposium on Integrated Rural Development,

Rome. GALJART,

D. (1982) Participation of Leiden, Institute of Cultural and Social Studies, University of Leiden. GAL-OYA DEVELOPMENT BOARD (1964) Annual Report. Colombo, Ceylon. GHATAK, S. et al. (1981) Technology Transfer to B. and BUIJS,

the Poor in Development,

Developing Countries: The Case of Industry. JAI Press, Greenwich, CO.

HAGEN,

E.

E.

(1968) Quoted

in G.

the Fertilizer

MYNDAL:

Asian Drama: An Ingoing into the Poverty of Nations,

Vol. III, p. 1912. Pantheon, New York. HAGUE, W. et al. (1977) Towards a theory of rural Development Dialogue. The Dag development, Hammerskjold Foundation, Uppsala, Sweden, p. 12. KAHL, J. (1969) The Measurement of Modernism. p. 6. University of Texas Press, Austin, TX. KATZ, S. M., MENUHIN, N. and LUDMER, H. (1978) Study of the Regional Organizations and Management of Development in Israel, Settlement Study Centre,

Rehovot,

Israel.

LAKASHMANAN, Rural

T. R. (1981) A Systems Model of United Nations Centre for

Development,

Regional Planning. MCNAMARA, R. S. (1980) Address to the Board of Governors, pp. 17-24. World Bank, Washington, DC. MOTOOKA, T. (1967) The conditions governing agricultural development in Southeast Asia, Devel. Econ., pp. 425-445. PAPENEK, G. F. (1967) Pakistan’s Development: Social Goals and Private Incentives. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. PEARSON, L. B. et al. (1969) Partners in Development. Report of the Commission of International Development. Pall Mall Press, London. PRION, I. (1968) Development Trends of Spatial Rural Cooperation in Israel. Publications on Problems of Regional development, No. 31, Settlement Study Centre, Rehovot, Israel. POTTER, J. M. (1971) Modernization processes and rural development in developing countries: and anthropological view. In: Rural Development in a Changing World, R. Weitz (Ed.). MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. RIVKIN, M. (1966) Settlement on the city of tomorrow in the developing countries, Ekistics, pp. 376378. THIEME, J. G. (1963): Handling storage and processing of agricultural produce. Summary of Proceedings on Agriculture of the UN Conference on the Application of Science and Technology for the Benefit of the Less Development Countries. FAO, Washington, DC. UNIDO (1978) Industrialization and Rural Development. United Nations Industrial Development

Organization, New York. UNIDO (1980) Appropriate

Industrial Technology for Light Industries and Rural Workshops. United Nations

Industrial Development Organization, New York. UNITED NATIONS (1975) Department of Economic and Social Affairs, World Economic Survey, 1964, New York. WATERSTON, A. (1965) Development Planning: Johns Hopkins Press, Lessons of Experience. Baltimore, MD. WEINTRAUB, D. (1981) Macro-Social Factors in Rural Development Change, SSC, Rehovot, Israel. WEITZ, R. (Ed.) (1971a) Development and Urbanization in the Developing Countries. Report on the Sixth Rehovot Conference. Praeger, New York. WEITZ, R. (Ed.) (1971b) Rural Development in a Changing World. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. WEITZ, R. (1971~): From Peasant to Farmer: A Revolutionarv Strategv for Development. Columbia University Press, New York. WEITZ, R. (1979) Integrated Rural Development-The on Problems of Rehovot Approach. Publications Regional Development, No. 28, Settlement Study Centre, Rehovot. WEITZ, R. (1986) New Roads to Development. Greenwood Press, Westport, CT. WEITZ, R. and ROKACH, A. (1968) Agricultural Development: Planning and Implementation: An Israeli Case Study, pp. 149-151. D. Reidel, Dordrecht. WEITZ, R. et al. (1978) Employment and Income in New Settlement Projects. World Generation

Employment Programme ILO, Geneva.

Research

Working

Paper,

Geoforum/Volume

36 WEST, Q. M. (1974) Development through farmer’s associations. The USDA-AID News Digest. WIGNARAJA, P. (1977) From village to global order, Devel. Dialogue, 1, pp. 35-78.

18 Number l/1987

BANK (1978) Rural Enterprise and Nonfarm Washington, DC. WORLD BANK (1982) World Development Report, 1982. Oxford University Press, New York.

WORLD

Employment,