scispace - formally typeset
Open Access

World Development Report 2004 : making services work for poor people

Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
The World Development Report (WDR) 2004 warns that broad improvements in human welfare will not occur unless poor people receive wider access to affordable, better quality services in health, education, water, sanitation, and electricity as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract
The World Development Report (WDR) 2004 warns that broad improvements in human welfare will not occur unless poor people receive wider access to affordable, better quality services in health, education, water, sanitation, and electricity. Without such improvements, freedom from illness and from illiteracy, two of the most important ways poor people can escape poverty, will remain elusive to many. This report builds an analytical and practical framework for using resources, whether internal or external, more effectively by making services work for poor people. The focus is on those services that have the most direct link with human development, education, health, water, sanitation, and electricity. This presents an enormous challenge, because making services work for the poor involves changing, not only service delivery arrangements, but also public sector institutions, and how foreign aid is transferred. This WDR explores the many dimensions of poverty, through outcomes of service delivery for poor people, and stipulates affordable access to services is low especially for poor people in addition to a wide range of failures in quality. The public responsibility is highlighted, addressing the need for more public spending, and technical adjustments, based on incentives and understanding what, and why services need to be improved. Thus, through an analytical framework, it is suggested the complexity of accountability must be established, as well as instruments for reforming institutions to improve services, illustrated through various case studies, both in developing, and developed countries. The report further outlines that scaling up reforms means sectoral reforms must be linked to ongoing or nascent public sector reforms, in areas such as budget management, decentralization, and public administration reform, stimulated through information as a catalyst for change, and as an input to prod the success of other reforms.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Providing Quality Infrastructure in Rural Villages: The Case of Rural Roads in China

TL;DR: Wang et al. as mentioned in this paper surveyed all rural road projects in 101 villages in rural China between 2003 and 2007 and measured the quality and per kilometer cost of each road, and found that road quality was higher when more of the project funds came from the government agency above.
Journal ArticleDOI

From the global politics of poverty alleviation to the global politics of social solidarity

TL;DR: The authors argue that the important role of the middle class in helping to expand state responsibility for social welfare and a minimum standard of living has been long forgotten, particularly in the case of women.
Journal ArticleDOI

The myth of ‘healthy’ competition in the water sector: The case of small scale water providers

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyze the degree and nature of competition between small-scale independent water providers and show that healthy competition with free market entry is an oversimplification of the function of the market, and in particular the complexities of service provision in this specific sector.
Journal ArticleDOI

Science, technology and sustainable development: a world review

TL;DR: In this paper, a holistic approach is used to critically examine the interrelationship between the natural, the governmental, the economic and the social dimensions of our world, and how science and technology can contribute to solutions.
Posted Content

The role of elected and appointed village leaders in the allocation of public resources: Evidence from a low-income region in China

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors examined whether elected village heads and appointed Communist party secretaries favor their own natural villages when distributing public resources, and found that favoritism does not compromise welfare of administrative villages.