Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.527210
Title: The impact of non governmental organisations (NGOs) on sustainable development in Botswana
Author: Mosweunyane, Dama
Awarding Body: University of Sheffield
Current Institution: University of Sheffield
Date of Award: 2010
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Access from Institution:
Abstract:
Development of Africa has featured in many debates, writings and researches about the continent. It is vivid that there exist a lot of theories that compete for the attention of the continent. This is primarily because there is no approach that can be said to be most suitable for rescuing the continent from its deprivation and economic backwardness. Botswana is a country that unlike others in the continent seems to be doing exceptionally well both economically and politically. However, some experts are not credulous to take the praises that are directed at Botswana without raising questions. They echo that underneath the praises exists abysmal poverty arriongst the citizens of this glorified country. The existence of Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in this country gives hope to many people who are relegated to deprivation and want, in a country that is acclaimed for its political and economical prosperity. This study attempts to demonstrate that Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs) are useful in development. However, they are faced with immense challenges that render them economically and politically powerless. Amongst those challenges is their inability to generate their own resources to fund their own projects, which inevitably makes them dependent on resources from the donors or governments. Most studies on NGOs have indicated that the problem of lack of resources have some negative impact on their relationship with their beneficiaries. This is often as a result of pressure that. they exact on their beneficiaries to meet terms and conditions that are drawn by the funding agencies. This arrangement fundamentally defeats the ideals of Sustainable Development that advocates for active participation of those people that are directly affected by their interventions. It comes to light that even in cases where NGOs display some willingness to involve their beneficiaries in their activities; it is always not easy due to insurmountable task of parrying influence from governments. The government of Botswana for instance, maintains its power over disempowered communities, so that it can act unilaterally without having to face resistance from politically and economically empowered communities. This study pointed out to the problem that is caused by the exclusion of NGOs by governments from their policies formulation structures. For instance, the government of Botswana used policies that were formulated through consultancies instead of those that are 10 inputted by poor people through NODs. It has to be made clear that even where NOOs attempt to enlist on the active participation of poor people, such efforts are usually undermined by their unwillingness' to formulate some withdrawal strategies. These strategies could fundamentally strengthen their quest to empower communities to realise both acceptable and necessary socio economic and political levels of development. There is a tendency for NOOs to give communities some falsified impression that they would always be available to assist them. This is often not communicated, but has a significant bearing in encouraging dependency of communities on NODs and other development agencies. Interestingly, this study has found out dep~ndency to be amongst the reasons why Sustainable Development, like other attempts made before, to have not succeeded. This study demonstrates adequately that NOOs in Botswana did not have any impact on Sustainable Development. It is evident that with programmes and projects' that NOOs obtrude on communities that they targeted, their beneficiaries are not empowered enough to sustain their level of economic and political development. They also do not get empowered to account for environmental resources that are supposed to be under their charge. The beneficiaries do not also account for the resources that are made available to them by the donors through NODs. The beneficiaries cannot demand accountability from their civil leaders because they are not empowered to do that.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.527210  DOI: Not available
Share: