Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.

Accepted Paper:

Owing and disowning aid: Projects, partnerships and patronage on Siquijor Island, Philippines  
Hannah Bulloch (Australian National University)

Paper short abstract:

Recipient ‘ownership’ of development interventions has become a key concept in international development orthodoxy. Focusing on development projects on the province-island of Siquijor in the Philippines, this paper considers some of the contradictions of ownership where international and local development agendas meet.

Paper long abstract:

A certain paradox of partnership is evident on Siquijor. The concept of partnerships between donors and recipients, enabling recipient governments and communities to 'own' development interventions, has become a key component of the international development orthodoxy. According to the governance and participation agendas, by putting local people 'in the driving seat', allowing them to design and manage the development process, a sense of ownership is generated, making interventions more relevant, effective and sustainable. The small province-island of Siquijor in the Central Visayas region of the Philippines has seen an array of international and national development projects operating around the principle of local ownership. But perhaps not surprisingly, reality on Siquijor defies the simplifications of development theory.

While projects on Siquijor seek more than ever to speak the language of partnership, in reality, they increasingly bypass existing structures of government, perceived as corrupt and lacking capacity. Furthermore, while donors and recipients are portrayed as having shared agendas, it is clear that what recipients are expected to 'own' is donor agendas. But politicians on Siquijor have their own agendas, also deeply concerned with the issue of ownership of projects but to quite different ends. In the context of factional patronage politics, local politicians have an interest in 'branding' projects with their name in order to shore up support. This has seen ownership of projects contested and appropriated by local patrons, but perhaps more unexpectedly, so too has it seen ownership disavowed and projects disowned.

Panel P10
Claiming and controlling need: who owns development and philanthropy?
  Session 1