Content area
Full Text
There is no standard definition of institutional development (ID) in the Third World literature. Blase suggests that "while a single, all-purpose definition of the institution would be convenient, it does not exist and the literature is not mature enough for its formulation at this time"[1, p. 329]. Blunt and Collins concur: "A variety of terms is used to describe (institutional development)...These expressions are...still relatively ill defined. Clarity of definition will help to ensure common interpretation and usage"[2, p. 112].
This article therefore looks at five topics in an attempt to review the concept of ID: institutions; development; institutional development; projects; and technical assistance. The review seeks to establish some clarity in the concept of ID.
Institutions
Two ideas are considered: institutions and development; and institutions and values.
Institutions and development
Adamolekun suggests that:
institutional weakness...constitutes a roadblock to development in developing countries. This problem of institutional weakness is reputed to be most severe in sub-Saharan Africa where the third UN Development Decade, the 1980s, has been written off as a lost decade[3, p. 5].
This seems to be a travesty of human endeavour. Salman reinforces the pivotal role of institutions to development:
Institutions are central to sustainable and beneficial economic growth. They create the policies, mobilise and manage the resources, and deliver the services which stimulate and sustain development. Growth and prosperity are unlikely to be maintained if the institutions which guide them are dysfunctional[4, p. 11].
Here, institutions seem to be the essential filter of, and guide to, the development process.
Kiggundi et al. state that "over 70 per cent of the world's population lives in developing countries that face challenging administrative problems in trying to survive"[S, p. 66]. The challenge is clear enough. When applied to urban development, the challenge is compounded.
Shabbir Cheema suggests that:
The impact of programmes aimed at providing urban shelter, services and infrastructure, depends upon the quality of institutions responsible for planning and implementing these projects. The institutional machinery provides the channel through which the urban sector issues and priorities are articulated, projects are planned and implemented, and inter-sectoral complementarity is accomplished. It serves as the most critical intervening factor through which economic resources and human skills are utilised for, among other things, promoting urban development[6, p. 149].