The Role of Northern-Based NGOs in Debt Relief
NGOs have done much to put the debt issue at the forefront of Northern countries' concerns. By putting a human face to the debt
crisis and pleading for greater justice and human rights, they have succeeded in rallying broad public support. They have pushed
governments to press for more radical debt cancellation measures. They are supporting civil society groups to ensure that these
groups play a crucial role in the development, monitoring, and implementation of poverty reduction plans.
When Jubilee 2000 was
launched five years ago,
there was skepticism about
the potential for international NGOs to
influence the debt-relief debate. Even
some international NGO staff were uneasy
about how public campaigning could
contribute to changes in the policies of
donors and global financial institutions
on an issue rooted so deeply in economic
theory and practice.
Yet, by now, the terms of the debate
have changed dramatically. In 2001 concrete
mechanisms are in place to deliver
debt relief linked closely with poverty
eradication. And few would deny that
NGOs have played a significant role in this
transition. This article reviews the key elements
of their contribution to the change.
Drawing on issues of morality and justice
The starting point of NGO advocacy on
debt cancellation has always been the
rights perspective, drawing on issues of
morality and justice. Debt could never
be a "campaignable" issue within a narrow
debate about particular economic
models. The rights approach personalizes
debt, making the link between creditors'
policies and the impact on real
people-people whose stories could be
told, through NGOs' close contact with
community-level programs.
The rights approach complemented
the religious imperative behind many of
the Jubilee 2000 coalition allies. Faith
groups brought with them huge constituencies
of public supporters engaging in
the debate on ethical terms. Emotive
symbols linking debt with the history of
colonialism and slavery set the terms of
run-up to the new millennium.
Public campaigning turned debt into
a potentially vote-winning issue for some
G7 governments. Among the G7 countries,
the different levels of public activism
on debt correlates closely with the
wide variation between their governments'
willingness to press for more urgent and
radical measures on debt cancellation.
NGO campaigners have been caricatured
as "standing on the outside throwing
bricks over the wall," in other words,
relying on a populist approach of destructive
criticism. But the newer, loosely targeted
anger by groups questioning the entire
legitimacy of the international financial
system should not obscure the clear
analysis at the heart of the debt campaign
strategy. Of course, any campaign seeks
to put pressure on decision-makers to go
be. But NGO campaigning has also
worked through strengthening the hand of
the reformers against the slower traditionalists.
Raising and demonstrating public
concern on the issue has created political
rewards for politicians who support
stronger action and has offered a new
source of legitimacy for those taking a
lead within international financial institutions.
So the variety of popular forms of
protest reflected not only a genuine uprising
of public passion about the impact
of debt on poor communities but also a
sense of purpose. Step-by-step changes
in G7 and donor commitments were seen
to be linked to changes in the political
environment caused by the campaigners.
The late-1999 decisions by U.K. and U.S.
governments to cancel bilateral debts
demonstrated this link most clearly.
During the 1990s northern-based
NGOs also became more sophisticated
in their relations with the media. This relationship
was central to making public
the links between public activism, personal
stories from southern communities
suffering the effects of debt, and the
policy actions required at international
high-level meetings.
The depth of international media
coverage around the Cologne and
Okinawa G7 summits was no accident.
Journalists had been fed analysis and stories
on the impact of debt by NGOs, had
been hosted by NGOs at community programs
in Africa, and had been put in touch
with celebrity supporters of the campaign,
who were themselves thoroughly
briefed by NGOs. As a result, even the
entertainment industry took up the debt
campaign, temporarily putting global financial
issues at the heart of European
popular culture.
For poverty eradication
A far more detailed, poverty-focused
analysis underpinned the headline campaign
messages of NGOs, which sought
to change the basis of the debate, away
from arguments limited to the effects of
debt and adjustment programs on the
economy as a whole and towards an
analysis of the impact of debt on the
poorest people in heavily indebted countries.
NGOs' policy departments proposed
specific mechanisms to translate
debt relief into poverty eradication.
The link between debt cancellation
and poverty eradication programs is now
so well established that the history of divergence
among G7 governments' and
donors' positions on this could one day
be forgotten. And yet, despite the successful
progress of debt relief through this
formula, the link remains at the heart of
NGOs' critique of the debt relief process.
Advocating for excluded countries
For example, Oxfam argues that the enhanced
Heavily Indebted Poor Countries
(HIPC) initiative is still based on criteria
that respond only peripherally to human
needs. Even after they receive debt relief,
Zambia, Tanzania, Senegal, Mauritania,
and Cameroon will continue to pay more
in debt repayments than their combined
budgets for health and primary education
2
.
If poverty eradication is genuinely the
driving purpose behind debt cancellation,
then the depth of debt cancellation needs
to be determined by governments' capacity
to finance basic services rather than by
their debt/export ratio.
Other assumptions within the current
approach to debt cancellation continue to
be challenged vigorously by international
NGOs. With debt relief now so closely
associated with hopes for meeting the
2015 international development targets,
there remains no justification for excluding
the many poor countries currently
missing from the HIPC framework. Seventy
percent of Nigeria's population live
on less than one dollar a day, in a country
which is Africa's largest debtor but which
is excluded from the HIPC initiative.
The automatic exclusion of countries
affected by conflict is also increasingly
questioned. The U.K.'s decision to hold
debt payments of conflict-affected countries
in trust until those conflicts are resolved
offers a potential model for debt
relief providing a financial incentive for
peace.
This has been the recurring pattern
of NGO advocacy on debt: at every stage
of the evolving arguments, we have asked
the simple question: "Why not?" The letter-
writing campaigners ask it in disbelief
that the bureaucracy cannot move
faster in the face of the catastrophic human
cost of debt. The policy analysts ask
the same question as they propose concrete
alternative approaches that could
break the deadlock.
NGOs have integrated debt campaigning
with advocacy around other opportunities
in the international arena. The
Global Education Campaign, a coalition
with members active in over 100 countries,
approached the World Education
Forum in April 2000 proposing financing
mechanisms for education closely
linked to a stronger debt-relief frame
work. Delegates at the WEF agreed to
organize a "Global Initiative" to develop
detailed strategies and financing mechanisms
to support their education commitments:
NGOs have led the pressure to
move this commitment beyond paper,
within the context of existing poverty-eradication
processes linked to debt reduction.
Civil society must be at the heart of the process
Finally, northern NGOs have worked
closely with southern networks to develop
a global movement for debt cancellation.
Providing the means for southern-
based campaigners to bring their experience
into northern-dominated
decision-making forums has been one element
of the support offered. Strengthening
southern partners' capacity for
analysis and policy work has been another.
This kind of support will be increasingly
important for international NGOs in
future phases of advocacy on debt. There
is a clear role for southern civil society
groups within the Poverty Reduction Strategy
Paper (PRSP) process, in developing
poverty reduction plans and also in monitoring
the implementation of those plans,
to make sure that debt relief genuinely
leads to rapid poverty eradication.
Some, such as the Uganda Debt Network,
have developed a strong monitoring
role within their existing campaign
on debt. Other groups have found the
PRSP consultation process too rapid and
inflexible to enable them to contribute.
International NGO support for their crucial
role aims to reverse a history of externally-
imposed aid conditionality. It
seeks to put national civil society groups,
which have some of the most important
expertise to offer, genuinely at the heart
of a process to ensure that debt cancellation
benefits those who need it most.
David Norman
Save The Children
1. Jubilee 2000 is an international movement for
the cancellation of the debt of the poorest countries.
2. Oxfam, 21tst Century Debt Relief, 1/15/2001:
http://www.oxfam.org.uk/policy/papers/debt.html
Previous Article: The HIPC Initiative | Contents Page | Next Article: Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs)
![[ADEA logo]](../../pics/top_main.gif)
![[Table]](../../pics/top_right.gif)
![[ADEA Newsletter Image]](../../pics/newsletter.jpg)
