Blockchain Papers

A. Hoek

IntroductionThe challenge for land use management in the nineties is to initiate a people- centered development process which creates opportunities for local people to make their own choices about which development strategy to follow. This need is felt in particular for upland areas where government initiated blue- print programmes for land use management have a record of failure. The major reason is that these programmes are often not adjusted to cope with the complexity and diversity of the uplands. Land use management encompasses both short-term and longterm benefits and is confronted with rapid changes. The differing role of private, state and communal lands in combination with a complex system of control and utilization makes land use management difficult to fully understand. This study responds with the development of an alternative strategy for planning sustainable land use programmes at local level and has the following objectives:- to develop a strategic model for people-centered planning of sustainable land use programmes;- to develop a flexible planning method that can serve as land use management tool at local level;- to test the feasibility of the strategy for the uplands of East Java, Indonesia.Strategic modelThe two major principles of the strategic model are:- Programmes are planned and implemented through a learning process in a local and organizational dimension. The local dimension includes a learning process of planning, implementing and monitoring of small scale programmes. The planning process is short, but planned interventions are regularly adjusted based on new insights and changing conditions. In the organizational dimension the learning process proceeds through three different phases of trial, development and expansion. In this dimension, the government can learn how to manage the strategy of implementing local level planning and how to change attitudes, norms and organizational competence of organizations in order to do so. This dimension embraces local, regional and national governments.- Three major variables have to be considered in programme planning: land use system; interventions and organizations. Sustainable land use programmes are only possible if a good fit between these variables is achieved.In the strategic model these two principles are combined; a fit between the variables is achieved through a learning process. Because achieving a fit between the three variables is a complicated matter, it requires a phased approach which consists of the following three steps: a trial phase, a development phase and an expansion phase. In the trial phase, the focus is on achieving a fit between interventions and land use system in the local dimension. This is achieved through the implementation of trial cases in local level planning in which villagers, field workers of organizations and local leaders become acquainted with this new approach of planning sustainable land use programmes at a local level. In the development phase, attention is focused on achieving a fit between organizations and land use system. Through the development of human resources and extension processes the skills and attitudes of those involved may gradually change to become more people-oriented. In the expansion phase the focus is on achieving a fit between interventions and organization. In this phase the planning approach is accepted and applied at a national level. Changes in government structures and procedures, such as decentralization and strengthening of local leadership need to be achieved. By dividing the process into phases, the complex problems associated with planning sustainable land use become manageable, and step by step the ultimate goal of achieving a fit between all three variables can be reached.Planning methodIn order to reach an optimal fit between the three variables of the strategic model in the trial phase, a planning method should be applied to collect and analyse data that can be transformed into the design of effective programmes. No 'off-the-peg' planning method is available, instead a combination of existing approaches, methods and techniques is needed.Three development approaches can be distinguished to this end: planning of land use development; extension approaches and project management approaches. Generally speaking, each approach covers a different side of the strategic model. Land use development focuses on achieving a fit between interventions and land use system; extension processes can be used in achieving a fit between land use system and organizations; and the fit between interventions and organizations can be accomplished with the help of project management techniques.For planning land use development in the trial phase a number of current methods and techniques are discussed. These are Farming System Analysis, Land Evaluation, Agroecosystem Analysis, Landscape Planning, Rapid Rural Appraisal and Gender Analysis. The criteria set by the strategic model determine which aspects of these present planning methods and techniques are useful for the development of a new planning method. None of these methods and techniques as such are ideal as an operational planning method for realizing the first phase of the strategic model. A synthesis of all useful features into a new land use planning method is proposed.For the trial phase the focus is on planning land use development while opportunities to develop extension processes and to influence project management are limited. Therefore plans should basically be tailored to the existing competence of organizations. Within these limitations some attention can be paid to extension processes and management techniques by introducing an additional step to land use planning, called programming which includes the preparation of a detailed design and a programme planning matrix.Planning environment on JavaThe environment for the planning of land use development programmes is diverse and complex in the uplands of East Java. Farmers react to the wide diversity in the land use system by developing a large number of different land use strategies. By contrast, government organizations use standardized programmes with uniform and mostly inflexible procedures for planning and implementation. Village development planning procedures exist, but do not yet function properly. Local organizations responsible for village development planning do not yet possess the skills and capability to develop such plans, and centrally organized sectoral agencies still dominate this 'bottom-up' planning process. The dominance of the central government can be explained by the incorporation of a number of socio-cultural features in their policy, such as the principles of 'sole authority', consensus, and harmony. The government uses these principles to encapsulate autonomous local organizations in the government administration, orienting the local leaders more to government rules and procedures than to the needs of the local population.This orientation towards government administration has two major implications for the current planning of interventions. Firstly, the interventions are adjusted to the competence of implementing organizations rather than letting the organizations develop their competence to implement the tasks of locally planned interventions. Secondly little more than lip-service is paid to the participation of villagers in planning.Notwithstanding these shortcomings in the present village development planning process, official government policy has some room for improvement. This may allow for a more balanced planning process new approach.Secondly, constraints which can be expected while applying the model on Java are described. The feasibility of the trial phase of the strategy is evaluated based on experiences with implementing the trial cases on Java. In this evaluation the question is raised as to what extent the results of local level planning on Java can respond to the research objectives as formulated at the start of this study. No experience has been gained as yet with implementing the development and expansion phase. One programme that provides some valuable lessons for the feasibility of the phased learning process of the strategic model is the Java Social Forestry Programme (JSFP). This programme has followed a comparable phasing strategy and has already reached the expansion phase.Conclusions and policy recommendationsThis evaluation results in a number of conclusions on conditions to be fulfilled for successful implementation of the strategy. To sum up:- although the strategy is aimed at the local level, it cannot be realized at local level only as it requires involvement of regional and national government organizations to deal with changing communication processes and organizational structure;- objectives in village development planning should be set realistically in the knowledge that short term results will always dominate long term benefits, tangible results will get higher priority than social changes, while top-down influences from sectoral agencies will prevail;- in addressing the organizational dimension a choice should be made between following an approach of 'decentralized trial cases' versus 'centrally guided bottom-up process'. Whichever strategy is chosen it needs careful management to avoid difficulties in institutionalization or a too rapid expansion respectively;- it is necessary for the government to be shown better results in terms of sustainable land use development programmes at local level implemented by highly committed villagers. Only then may they be motivated to accept such a participatory approach at the cost of losing some power or consensus;- implementing a participatory planning process is an initially slow process, to which government agencies need to be committed.These conditions are translated into a number of policy recommendations for donor agencies and governments pertaining to: long-term and continuous com

Joshua A. Fishman, Stacey Churchill

This book provides an overview of the principles used by policy makers in western industrialized countries as they seek to meet the educational needs of cultural and linguistic minorities as diverse as Australian aboriginal peoples, resident foreign workers in Western Europe and Francophone minorities in Canadian provinces. This is a synthesis of information gathered in more than 30 national case studies and consultants' reports prepared for an OECD-sponsored study entitled: Finance, Organisation and Governance of Education for Special Populations. Drawing on this data, the author shows that current policies fit within a relatively simple framework of development by stages, each stage determined by the assumptions used in defining the educational problem to be solved. At the lower end of the scale, methods are borrowed from special education of the mentally retarded; at the upper end, the minorities are treated as equals or near equals in mature bilingual and multilingual nations such as Finland or Switzerland. The emphasis is on showing how policy makers grapple with tradeoffs to determine the best policy mix, such as between centralization and decentralization or between financial incentive schemes and direct regulation, in order to ensure adequate educational services for the minorities. The entire analytical framework is shown to fit within an integrated model linking minority aspirations, public attitudes and governmental policy responses.

Stephen D. Sugarman

Parents and teachers seem increasingly alienated from their own schools. Here are two proposals for giving individual parents and teachers power to determine how small but significant portions of the school budget will be spent. I am convinced that we need much more experi mentation with true decentralized control over the spending of educational funds; not the creation of minidistricts or the adoption of school-site budget ing, but rather decision making at the individual teacher and individual family levels. I recognize the power of the entrenched bureaucracies: school boards and administrators on the one hand, teacher organizations on the other. For some time to come they will exercise hegemony over most public education dollars. But perhaps there is an oppor tunity for innovation at the margin. This opportuni ty is limited because there are few new public dollars available for education beyond those in evitably committed to cost-of-living increases in employee salaries. Yet this makes all the more important the desirability of trying out bold alterna tives with those funds. The past few years of experience with more centralized decision making with respect to new (or extra) money ? federal Title I funds and similar pots or large increases in general state aid brought about through school finance reform ? have shown us that this route typically results in either 1) in creases in employee salaries or 2) the hiring of more personnel ? either aides or specialists (usually read ing specialists), plus bureaucrats. In a few places these expenditures are thought to be educationally quite successful. If nothing else, they may be viewed as medium-scale public employment and guaran teed-wage programs or, to the extent that school volunteers are being converted into paid workers, an inventive income transfer scheme. Yet it is not clear