--------------------------------------------
A Human Rights Framework for Development in Tibet
By Carole Samdup
Source: Trin-Gyi-Pho-Nya [སྤྲིན་གྱི་ཕོ་ཉ་], Tibet Justice Center, Vol. 2, Issue 3, May 2004.
When the Tibetan government-in-exile (TGIE) released its new Guidelines for International Development Projects and Sustainable Development in Tibet last month, it emphasized a "needs-based approach" for planning and implementation of development initiatives on the high plateau. In adopting this needs approach, the TGIE has failed to take into account the current momentum within development circles for a rights-based framework for development planning, implementation and evaluation strategies.
In describing its rationale for a needs-approach, the TGIE said:
"It is time for a new approach based directly on human needs because the human needs approach is direct, observable, locally-based and not reliant on mammoth investment, grandiose visions or ideological convictions."
A needs-based approach to development in Tibet abandons the Tibetan people to the whims and discretionary policies of politicians within the various levels of government in China as well as those of Western bureaucrats and the aid agencies they control. Moreover, a needs approach does nothing to address the negative impact that sometimes results from the activities of international agencies or transnational corporations. The Tibetan people are provided neither dignity nor legal recourse should their human rights be violated as a result of inappropriate or harmful “development” practices of any type.
A rights framework for development is holistic in nature and promotes the realization of all human rights – civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights. It emphasizes the interdependence between democratic governance and social progress. Far from focusing on "grandiose visions" or "ideological convictions," a rights framework places the human person at the centre of the development process and provides an internationally-recognized legal framework for meaningful individual and collective participation. This quality is particularly relevant for the Tibetan people living under Chinese rule.
The trend towards rights-based frameworks for development stems primarily from concerns about the erosion of national autonomy in the face of globalisation and, in particular, of economic liberalization and integration. It is related to the inability of national governments to create or protect national legislation designed to ensure equitable distribution of wealth and non-discriminatory provision of services within their borders. A rights-based framework also responds to the particular problems faced by a people living under the political control of another group with conflicting interests or priorities for development programming.
In the case of Tibet a rights-approach would, theoretically at least, empower the Tibetan people to claim such things as the continuous improvement of living standards, non-discrimination in the provision of healthcare or education, and active participation in decision-making with regards to the use of natural resources. It would influence programming by Western agencies to prioritize activities that serve those objectives.
A rights framework for development provides a number of other distinct advantages. Primarily, it uplifts the human person to a position of dignity in that he/she claims specific inalienable rights or entitlements from government rather than accepting random benefits provided on a discretionary basis for undetermined lengths of time and under variable conditions. Moreover, the non-discrimination requirement that governs all human rights mitigates social exclusion by requiring that special emphasis is placed on the delivery of development benefits to vulnerable sectors of society, such as rural people.
Oxfam International has articulated the value-added of a rights framework for development in a recent paper entitled, International Frameworks, Policies Priorities and Implications: A Guide for NGOs:
"A rights approach assumes that there is an acknowledged duty-bearer with a responsibility to respect, protect and fulfil the rights of a legitimate claimant or rights holder. The welfare concept of beneficiary is incompatible with a rights-based approach. Further, the language of unfulfilled or denied rights, must replace the language of needs, an idea of entreaty or charity that is also incompatible with a rights-based approach".
In fact, a needs-approach may be effective in democratic states with active civil societies and freedom of expression, association and opinion. In that situation, government is generally responsive to community participation and accountable to public scrutiny of the implementation process. In Tibet, this is not the case. Development priorities are determined in Beijing, often with political objectives, and foreign development assistance is required to adopt the overarching design of that development strategy. Even if some needs are met along the way at the project level, there is no over-arching framework that addresses the structural causes of under-development.
While the substantive content of the TGIE guidelines is comprehensive and relevant, it is the framework in which it is written that fails to empower the Tibetan people to adequately lead their own development process. What is required is a fresh look at the meaning and goal of development in its broadest sense. A rights framework for the TGIE's development recommendations would build Tibetan autonomy by providing the Tibetan people with a measure of ownership over their development process.
===============================================
Letter to the Editor
From the Environment and Development Desk of the Tibetan Government-in-Exile
Trin-Gyi-Pho-Nya, Vol. 2, No. 4, July 2004
This is in response to Carole Samdup's comments (Op-ed: A Human Rights Framework for Development in Tibet) on the Guidelines for Development in Tibet in the last issue of TRIN-GYI-PHO-NYA, May 06, 2004, Vol. 2, No. 3. Her comments are highly appreciated. However we feel that our stress on needs-based development as an alternative to China's present development strategy in Tibet under the Rationale section of the Guidelines has been misunderstood.
A careful study of the Guidelines in its entirety would show that we are deeply concerned about the rights of the Tibetan people to participate in the development process right from the planning stage. When we say "a new approach based directly on human needs....", we are not necessarily advocating the conventional needs-based strategy. We are talking about a strategy that addresses the basic needs of the Tibetan people through their own active participation.
In the Guidelines, the last of four underlying principles, Participatory and Needs-based Development, should make our stand clear:
"Usurpation and co-option of public powers by groups or individuals becomes self-development of vested interests rather than addressing the interests of the people. To ensure that development projects are sensitive and accountable to the needs of the people, empowerment of the grassroots level populace through genuine participation is essential. Participatory development would naturally safeguard the needs of local people...
So, when designing projects, it is crucial that the development agencies find skillful and innovative ways to assess the needs and involve the local populace, and at the same time avoid the clear danger of putting them at risk due to the ire of local authorities. Institutionalisation of procedures and democratic governance at the grassroots level are essential steps toward self-governance..."
The Guidelines have advocated neither a needs-based nor a rights-based approach per se. Instead, we have taken a pragmatic and flexible approach to development based primarily on the needs of Tibetans. To be precise, under the section Crosscutting Guidelines, it says:
"...The Tibetan worldview and modern synthesis of appropriate development practices encourages a respectful, thoughtful approach to development that embraces many factors rather than a narrow, technical compliance with shallow and literal considerations..."
The Guidelines are an attempt to facilitate and promote better development practices under the present, complicated situation. They emphasize that the needs of the Tibetan people should be articulated by the Tibetans themselves and not by the State or other outside actors.
Read more on this article...
