NGO Another Way (Stichting Bakens Verzet), 1018 AM
Edition 02: 24 May, 2009
01. E-course : Diploma in Integrated Development (Dip. Int. Dev)
SECTION A : DEVELOPMENT PROBLEMS.
Study value :
04 points out of 18.
Indicative
study time: 112 hours out of 504.
Study points
are awarded only after the consolidated exam for Section A : Development
Problems has been passed.
First block : Poverty and quality of life.
Study value :
02 points out of 18.
Indicative
study time: 57 hours out of 504.
Study points are
awarded only after the consolidated exam for Section A : Development
Problems has been passed.
First block : Poverty and quality of life. [57 hours]
First Block : Section 1. Analysis of the causes
of poverty. [26.50 hours]
First Block : Section 2. Services needed for a good quality of
life. [26.50 hours]
First Block : Exam. [ 4 hours each attempt]
First Block : Section 2. Services needed for a good quality of
life. [26.50 hours]
Part 1 : Introduction to
the services needed for a good quality of life. [06.50 hours]
01. The bases of a good quality of life.
05. Typical drawing of a well/borehole area.
09. Complete system for waste recycling.
Part 1 : Introduction to
the services needed for a good quality of life. [06.50 hours]
12. Work for all. (At least 30 minutes).
An analysis
will now be made of the sixth factor necessary to a good quality of life :
work for all.
Look at
slide :
What is «work » ?
Re-read
the notes you made at the start of the course for Section 1 of Block 1 : 02 In-depth analysis of some factors linked to
poverty. Many formal activities considered to be «productive » by
economists and which contribute to the formation of the Gross Domestic Product
(GDP) do not improve the quality of life of the populations. Many informal
activities considered by economists as being «unproductive» which DO
improve the quality of life of the populations are, instead, excluded from the
formation of the Gross Domestic Product.
Read the following article published by NGO
Stichting Bakens Verzet (Another Way):
“2.1.03 Monetisation and the
economy
Standards for economic comparisons are most
often developed by western economists who fail to take the non-monetised part of
economies into account. Yet only a relatively small part of the world's global
economy is "monetised". The percentage represented by the monetised
part of the economy tends to be higher in “industrialised” countries than it is
in less developed economies. However, even in the most “developed”
industrialised countries, only part of the real productive economy is
“monetised”.
“The output of domestic and personal services
produced for own consumption within households is not included [in the Output
product for own final use (p.12)]” (The 1993 SNA System of
National Accounts, United Nations Statistics Division, Section VI The Production Account, par. 6.46).
If one were to proceed to subtract the
percentage of negative economic parasitic activities in industrialised nations
from positive productive ones, the difference between the net pro-capita
productivity of industrial countries and that of developing economies might
turn out not to be so big as one might imagine. For instance, the costs in
time, use of infrastructure, fuel consumption, and equipment write-off of a
western commuter who loses four hours a day in queues going to and returning
home from work are monetised though they tend to have a negative weighting on
our quality of life. They become part of our so-called gross national product.
Benefits enjoyed by an African herdsman who spends the same four hours a day in
the shade of a tree discussing philosophy with his friends are not monetised.
Yet which of them has the better quality of life at least during those four
hours? How do the individuals involved perceive their quality of life during
those four hours? How far is their quality of life directly influenced by money
in such cases?
One acceptable way of assessing productivity is
by connecting it with the length of a human life. While life expectancy varies
from one country to another, most of us divide a day into 24 hours. Most of us
spend about eight hours sleeping, which means our potential active productivity
has to be fitted into the remaining 16 hours per day. We assume, for the
purposes of making an example, an average life span of 75 years. Appropriate
allowance has to be made for children. This allowance varies according to the
customs and conditions of life in any given community. Let us assume the
allowance is 15 years. No account is taken in this example of old age. Our
potentially productive life-span is then 75 years (life span) minus 15 years
(unproductive childhood) or 60 years. Our total potential for productivity is
in that case 60 years x 365 days x 16 hours, or about 350.000 hours. The time each individual has available for
active productivity is therefore finite. On an average, it is potentially
comparable but not the same for every individual or for every community. How an
individual chooses or is able to use the time potentially available to him for
active productivity (in the example 350.000 hours) is in theory very
subjective. In practice, however, it is usually subjected to restrictions. In some cases, such as slavery, the
individual may have no choice at all.
Any
activity which tends to improve the quality of life of the individual and of
the family and community he or she lives in is productive. Any activity which
does not tend to improve one’s quality of life or that of the family and
community he or she lives in is unproductive. Viewed this way, four hours spent
by a woman cleaning the family home and preparing food for dinner is
productive. The fours hours spent by a commuter in his car going to and
returning from work are essentially unproductive, as are the use of
infrastructure, fuel consumption, and equipment write-off involved. The work of
the woman improves the quality of life of her family; the time spent by the
commuter in his car in general does not.
Since women constitute about 50% of the world’s
population, the productivity of women at home, working in the fields, bringing
up children, helping elderly family members already represents at least 50% of
the real productive economy. This productivity does not usually change much
even where women also have a job outside of their home environments. Since many
women work domestically this way at least 12 hours a day without payment
compared with a theoretic average of 8 hours a day their husbands actually
spend at their paid work, percentages of 60% non-monetised activity and 40%
monetised activity already arise in western economies even before other factors
are taken into account. If unemployed, the sick, the handicapped, and people on
a benefit together with other common activities such as voluntary work,
gardening and the like are also considered, the monetised productivity quota in
a developed economy is in reality
considerably lower than 40%. It may not exceed 20%.
In some developing countries the monetised part
of the economy may be as small as 10% of a country’s notional national product.
The application of universal income policies
might lead to some changes in this field. This is because the universal income
system recognises, amongst other things, the productivity of women in the home,
and the productivity of students during their study. However, universal income
is apparently not considered by the elites currently holding economic power to
be in their favour. So no country has yet adopted it. The important and useful
traditional work of many women in looking after children and doing household
chores is therefore not monetised, even in Western countries. Nor are the
numerous other productive activities conducted by family members in general
outside their period of paid employment and professional activities.”
For
more detailed on this subject read Analyzing the Policy Implications
of Time Use Data,
United Nations Economics and
Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), Discussion Document drafted
for ESCAP Workshop “Workshop for High Level Policy
Makers on Counting Policy Implications of Time Use Survey Data”, 11-15
September 2000,
On
page 3 of the report it is said that:
“A progressive shift of activities from the
non-monetised household sector to the monetised economy is the core of the
development process. But economics, dominated by the neo-classical school, has
largely confined itself to phenomena that take place within the monetised
economy.”
The Model for
integrated development projects :
a) Considers
as productive any activity which tends to improve the quality of life of the population
and unproductive any activity which doesn’t.
b) Recognises
that many (most) productive activities are not monetised, while many
unproductive activities are.
c) Provides
for local money systems enabling the de facto monetisation of all productive activities
in each project area.
1. Research.
On the basis of these three principles, make an analysis of the average
number of hours of «productive »
activity of an average woman and an average man in your chosen project
area.
Calculate the total number
of hours daily of productive work in
your project zone..
Multiply the hours of productive activity by the average hourly
salary applicable in the formal sector
in your project area..
Determine (calculate) the relationship between the total value
(expressed in formal money) of the productive activities that you have
developed and the
one presented for your chosen area in the national statistics calculated
using the method provided by the 1993 SNA System of
National Accounts .
◄ First block : Poverty and quality of life.
◄ Index : Diploma in Integrated Development
(Dip.Int.Dev)
