Comments

Let me respond to Dr. Telue's false allegations. As you can see on my LinkedIn profile, I served in executive positions with board accountability for over 6 years total as Acting Center Director of School for Field Studies (based in Beverley MA, USA), as Academic Director (PVC academic) at Zudy University (Maastricht Netherlands) and as Development and Research Funding Officer accountable to the Research School board at Maastricht University (top #5 in THE ranking of young universities). The issue is moot in any case because the Sevua Investigation clearly established in 2013 that I had been lawfully and regularly appointed. The issue was brought up again in 2018 for purely political reasons. The government decided foreign Vice Chancellors were too much of a risk, exposing the joint criminal enterprise or mafia-like organizations that some PNG universities have become. In fact, Dr. Telue himself was an active participant when in November 2017 he came to the Administration Building with a fake court order and in company of armed police, trying to evict the Vice Chancellor. I helped him to find a graceful exit and establish himself, but he still enjoys attacking me with false allegations.

Hi Lisa, great piece and looking forward to reading the other two articles. I agree that aid programs are moving from conventional programming to adaptive programming, and also captures political economy analysis (PEA) or thinking and working politically. I work in this space in PNG for a while now and can attest this change. The theory of change that follows conventional programming approach centres on 'planning from the outside' for a client, and in nearly all cases does not involve the client(s). If it does, it reflects those who are not immediately affected. It involves very little PEA, and also very little of Thinking and Working Politically. I believe that is where the problem lies and the issues of sustainability, capacity building and all else with reforms. The planning for adaptive programming approach takes the best of both worlds- conventional and adaptive. The Theory of change for an adaptive approach considers the 'context', and within that 'context' are 'local solutions to address local problems' with involvement of local actors, driving the change. This is something pertinent to PNG, and I am sure others as well. The adaptive programming approach, with involvement of PEA and inclusion of thinking and working politically, I am sure will make a difference in how donors work, and especially in PNG. I hope your other articles capture aspects of the above.

Dear Michael Kabuni, this is an an excellent blog post. Political parties as a institution have only begun to form political positions on some issues affecting Papua New Guinea in a broad range of area's. However, the maturity continuum of PNG political parties and their party policies have only began to discover the importance of party policies platforms only insofar as it attracts membership to their party, relatively recently. I think part of this interest is buttressed or aided by the establishment of the Integrity of Political Parties and Candidate's Commission. I do agree with you to some degree that political party coalitions have largely been influenced by monosaturated politics over time since the first General Elections in 1962. It is only recently that there is a huge contradiction between Monosaturated Politics and Polysaturated Politics. The question is : do policies matter? I think the answer to that question is best informed by how the party leader's and political power-brokers answer this question on the floor of parliament during the formation of government. Of course the party with the biggest number of votes is invited by the Governor General to form government. Academically , yes political party policies are important. Politically, it's important to be in a party. In practice, it depends on political thinking at that very moment. I think the most important question for me is: why can't smaller parties merge with bigger parties?

Hi Lisa, Thanks for this piece, and we are looking forward to the next two as well. I did want to comment on your remarks on technical assistance, and the claim that the worst form of TA is one of capacity substitution. My experience is the opposite. The use of "advisors" to pursue the old holy grail of "building capacity" more often fails than succeeds. Much better that the expensive experts actually do something useful - especially in fragile states when they are typically "substituting" for non-existent capacity (and when they often have no-one interested in their advice). I've written about this quite a lot in the PNG context, and I'd invite anyone interested in the subject to read my blog: https://devpolicy.org/shifting-in-line-in-png-20150806/. Relatedly, I do think there is a danger that we put too much under the adaptive rubric. Whether it is better to hire people to provide or build capacity has nothing to do with whether a particular program is designed adaptively. Regards, Stephen

Most people dont realise how important party platforms and policies are. I personally see that most policies our current political parties dwell on seems old. For instance, 'Free education policy', that was PDM pary platform . However, many smaller parties do not have a clear cut on their partys platform and policies. It is better to draw party policies and platforms according to situations and changes we are facing now and what would come after.

Thanks Lisa for this nice piece. Aid programs need to follow conventional methods of flexibility, adaptability and working politically to appease both the donor and recipient countries so that both are on a winning curve. The Australian Aid program to the Pacific and elsewhere followed this method of aid program. The implementing parties and the recipient governments are guided in this principal to make good use of aid funding or other form of assistance. However, two important factors that you have not discussed here are sustainability and managing risks. Aid is external support with a fixed timeframe, the aftermath of the aid program is all about sustaining the program itself or integrating it into existing country’s program - sustainability. How the direct and associated risks which emerge as a result of aid programs is managed, is another key question. Without sustainability and a risk management plan, one would hardly anticipate adaptability of aid program in a country’s development or strategy. Currently in PNG and Pacific countries, Australian aid program emphasis more on sustainability and risk management of aid program than adaptability.

Thanks for reading, Lily. Yes, I agree on that gender equality is integral to women empowerment. I also believe that gender equality is the end goal. However, to answer your question, I think that chickens contribute to gender equity, the 'middle step' towards gender equality and full empowerment. Here I refer to equity as 'fairness of treatment for women and men according to their needs'. Women, in the settings presented in the article, cannot access all types of livestock, land, and machinery which is a clear symptom of the lack of gender equality. Women, however, can own chickens gaining the right to use them, the benefits of having them, the obligations of taking care of them, and the opportunities of engaging in businesses, all these rights that other livestock owners (most of them men) have. As you well said, empowerment involves a process of economic, political and social participation that brings the capacity of making decisions. I think this article, framed by the WELI index, shows clear evidence that chickens contribute to such empowerment. To finalize, I think that If we try to directly adapt the full concept of empowerment and equality in these contexts without acknowledging the local context and processes, we may end up– as someone well pointed out in the New York Times – "abandoning the good by insistence on the great". Empowerment and equality will be a long process that, fortunately, already started. All the best, JP

Looking forward to reading Miranda Forsyth and Sue Farran's book - in particular, keen to read their insights about" thinking beyond the frame that the State is the quintessential solution each and every time" and " blending better – or ‘weaving’ ... state and non-state methods of regulation." This is an approach taken to varying degrees for land legislation around the Pacific, and interesting to learn about other contexts and particularly what approaches will be more lasting for countries.

Almost all parties have some form of policy towards, though it's not stated in terms which would be easy to analyse. For instance, phrases like "improve rural health, promote healthy living, provide critical drugs, improve human resource and capacity building etc." It's the same with most of the policies of these parties. Generic.

The definition, measurable indicators and evidence-based data are important to reckon differing perspectives. Women empowerment (see UN/WB definitions) is defined a process for economic/ political/social participation (genuine not token) together with capacity to make choices ...side by side with gender equality. Accordingly, how does raising chicken fit into the definition? As gender equality is integral to women empowerment, how are they linked? How does chicken raising make for sustainable development, uplift poor women and their families out of the quagmire of cyclical poverty?

Very interesting blog. How about health policy(ies)? It looks obvious our leaders are concerned too much on power grabbing than addressing or having less consideration into public health.

Great article. There are various online platform to <a href="https://indonesian-online.com/learn-indonesian-language/" rel="nofollow">Learn Indonesian Language</a> which saves your time and money also. Keep sharing.