LIDS LIVE – Page 5

February 20, 2015February 20, 2015

The Need for Art[istic Creativity] in Public Policy

By: Mary-Jean Nleya

As Victor Shklovsky points out, “Art [is] a technique” which should serve as a tool to be used in addressing various societal woes. As evidenced by Mayor Mockus in 1995 to address Bogota’s challenges of the time including, among others, addressing the society’s disregard for traffic laws, which resulted in numerous fatalities. He tackled this problem in a humorous way, by having stars painted on the roads where pedestrians had been involved in motor vehicle accidents and killed. He also employed the use of mimes on the roads. Mockus had positive results (a drop in fatalities) following his unconventional approaches to attempting to solve the society’s problems. For more information, see here.

Unconventional thinking is necessary for policy-makers to innovate solutions to the world’s various challenges. I think Shklovsky rightly points out that “habitualization devours work”. I’ve interpreted this to mean conventional solutions hinder progress and thereby stifle the pursuit of addressing various issues. Searching for solutions through the lens of conventional thought will not proffer innovative solutions that the world is in need of. In the pursuit of searching for solutions to the intractable economic and social challenges, I have learned through Shklovsky’s essay that “parallelism” is a technique that policy-makers and social entreprenuers should make use of, that is, moving away from the “usual perception of an object into a sphere of a new perception”. It is evident from the article that we need to move away from “automatized” solutions.

As I reflect on another example on using artistic creativity, a housing-infrastructure project by Indian architect Charles Correa (known as “Artist Village”) comes to mind. Correa innovated a viable housing solution for Mumbai, mass affordable housing for low and middle income households, which went beyond conventional design. His housing architectural design of the structures enables the dwellers to expand their housing as their circumstances permitted (such as having walls with no windows) (for more info see: http://foundationsakc.com/projects/housing/artist-village-charles-correa ).

In the words of Doris Sommer (in The Work of Art in the World: Civic Agency and Public Humanities, 2014) , “learning to think like an artist […] is basic training for our volatile times”, this is evident from the works of the various innovators that have tapped into their ‘artistic’ selves to address the various societal challenges. It is therefore imperative that policy-makers employ unconventional and ‘artistic’ policies that will be effective.

In the two above cases: the difficulty in changing behavioral patterns (in the society’s disregard for traffic laws) was achieved through humor and art; while the infrastructure development project to address housing affordability in Mumbai was addressed through unconventional artistic design – which proves to have been effectual.

Therefore, exploring art is to viewed as one of the “greatest renewable resources [to] address the world’s fundamental challenges of disease, violence, and poverty” (Summer, 2014), and ought to be viewed as such in the public policy realms.

February 15, 2015February 15, 2015

This Week: LIDS 2015 Spring Symposium

COMBATING GRAND CORRUPTION: IS INTERNATIONAL LAW THE ANSWER?
February 20, 2015 | 12–4 PM
Austin Hall, Room 111, Harvard Law School

The past decade has seen an impressive expansion of global efforts to combat corruption. Instruments such as the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), the U.K. Bribery Act, the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, and the United Nations Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) have been operationalized to investigate, punish, and prevent bribery of public officials. China has notably embarked upon a recent campaign to eradicate corruption and countries around the world have developed anti-corruption strategies and commissions in compliance with the international treaty regime.

Yet many of these national plans remain aspirational and corruption continues to plague developing economies and communities throughout the world. The strides that have been made have largely affected the “supply side” – companies and individuals who pay bribes or offer the equivalent thereof – rather than the “demand side” – public officials or power brokers who request something of value in exchange for conferral of a benefit. This one-sided approach is particularly problematic in situations of grand corruption, defined by Transparency International as “acts committed at a high level of government that distort policies or the central functioning of the state, enabling leaders to benefit at the expense of the public good.” The successful eradication of corruption and its consequences depends upon removing officials who perpetuate misconduct.

For a host of legal, diplomatic, and practical reasons, penalizing corrupt public officials presents many challenges. Nevertheless, a number of ideas have been posited. Scholars, like Sonja Starr, have argued that corruption should be designated an international crime. Civil society groups, like the Global Organization of Parliamentarians Against Corruption, have advocated for special courts to prosecute cases of grand corruption. Judge Mark Wolf recently authored a paper calling for the establishment of an international anti-corruption court.

This timely conference will bring together experts from Harvard, the World Bank, the U.S. State Department, the U.S. Department of Justice, the International Criminal Court, the private sector, and civil society to assess current challenges and potential solutions to confronting the highest levels of government corruption.

Details of the event can be viewed at https://orgs.law.harvard.edu/lids/2015-symposium-speakers-schedule/

February 2, 2015February 2, 2015

Aid versus Entrepreneurial Solutions: Approaches to Solving Social & Economic Problems

By: Mary-Jean Nleya

While economic growth strategies are at the forefront of many national and international policy decisions, there are many debates as to what approaches work and which ones do not. I came across Dambisa Moyo’s Dead Aid, where she argues against the efficacy of the aid model as an attempt to solve Sub-Saharan Africa’s social and economic problems. She contends that this model has fueled corruption and has stifled sustainable economic growth on the continent. She suggests that to ensure sustainable economic growth, a different approach should be incorporated into the African growth strategy: access to the capital markets, increased trade, and micro-finance. She particularly commends China’s involvement in the continent as a positive intervention.

Whereas on the other hand, the aid model is advocated for by many, who argue that aid – if designed properly – may help ensure economic growth.

I had not decided for myself which side of the debate I lean more towards. However, by observing various efforts and their results, I have found that the ‘no-aid’ debate is more persuasive.

The challenges – the “institutional voids” (a term coined by Professors Khanna and Palepu) – that face Sub-Saharan Africa (as well as other emerging economies) serve as the basis from which the incredible business potential available on the continent springs. It can be said, though not expressed in Dead Aid, that China is perhaps filling in the institutional voids in Sub-Saharan Africa, either in infrastructure development or in Energy, for a quid pro quo.

Whilst China’s involvement has, arguably, been filling institutional voids, some of the involvement has been to the detriment of some sectors on the continent. One such example is in Botswana. There had been a major setback to Botswana’s power sector. The engineering and construction of the power plant (Morupule B project) was awarded to a Chinese company. However, in 2013 major problems – during the commissioning phase of the project – began to cause power cuts throughout the country, until the Chinese company was replaced for the maintenance and operation of the project. The project and the resultant problems cost Botswana millions of Pula (Botswana’s currency). (For more information, see here . )

Whether Botswana’s power issue is attributable to the Botswana government’s oversight or the Chinese company is debatable.

However, entrepreneurial solutions are imperative to solving social and economic problems on the continent, and that is to be done by filling the “institutional voids”. Notwithstanding, aid (emergency and humanitarian aid) is appropriate in certain circumstances, such as after natural disasters and as assistance for disease outbreaks.

Ultimately, aid cannot do for Africa what the Marshall Plan did for Western Europe. Advancing and growing African countries’ collective and respective economies require an entrepreneurial approach. However, the various African governments should be alert and ensure the “institutional voids” sought to be filled are indeed filled with due regard to professional and high quality standards, to avoid the power problems that Botswana experience(d).

November 22, 2014November 22, 2014

Symposium Recap: Post-Conflict Reconstruction, Rebuilding from Emergency to Development

On Friday, October 31, 2014, experts, scholars, and practitioners in the field of post-conflict reconstruction convened at Harvard Law School for our annual symposium. This year, the Symposium’s theme was Post-Conflict Reconstruction: Rebuilding from Emergency to Development, and focused on strategies to best promote growth, stability, and long-term development in countries arising from violent conflict. Speakers and panelists discussed issues facing countries that having arisen from conflict such as Rwanda, to countries that are very much still in the process of transition, like Syria.

The event started with an illuminating talk by Keynote Speaker Dr. Donald Kaberuka, President of the African Development Bank, and former Minister of Finance and Economic Planning in Rwanda. Dr. Kaberuka spoke in depth about strategies to promote growth and development in fragile and post-conflict states. To begin with an example, he spoke about how a brutal civil war destroyed much of infrastructure, including health systems, education systems and infrastructure, in Guinea, leading to the country’s inability to effectively control the Ebola epidemic today (coupled with a poor international response). Dr. Kaberuka further went on to emphasize how conflict can happen anywhere, and is not limited to Africa — despite certain stereotypes. Dr. Kaberuka spoke about the Bank’s work in this area, particularly in: rebuilding economies; rebuilding capacities; and helping post-conflict countries reengage with the international community. In particular, he emphasized that each conflict and each country can be drastically different, so there are no one-sized solutions; it depends very much on the state and who controls it.

In addition, he noted a few factors for success: first, a strong sense of ownership and responsibility; second, be pragmatic, but understand that making mistakes is normal; third, turn weaknesses into opportunity; and fourth, engage the private sector and leverage it to rebuild the economy. It is important to take bold steps early on, including abolishing controls, liberalizing, and ensuring independence of the central bank, and yet to redistribute wealth by investing in health and education. Ultimately, it is up to each nation to engage in rebuilding the country and resolving their problems. As he stated, “Rebuilding a nation cannot be outsourced. Only the nationals can rebuild their country.”

Click here to download a video of Dr. Kaberuka’s talk.

Following Dr. Kaberuka’s talk, we moved on to the first panel, titled Driving Economic Growth and Building Institutions After Conflict. The panel featured practitioners, academics and policymakers who work in government institutions and non-profits to promote growth and institution building in post-conflict countries. Panelists included: Catherine Anderson, Justice and Conflict Advisor, World Bank Justice Reform Practice Group; Sarah Cliffe, Special Adviser for East Asia and Pacific Region, World Bank; Robert Jenkins, Deputy Assistant Administrator, USAID Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance (DCHA) and Executive Director, USAID Task Force on Syria; and Barbara Smith, Senior Director for Governance and Law, Asia Foundation. The panel was moderated by Michael Woolcock, Lead Social Development Specialist, World Bank Development Research Group and Lecturer in Public Policy, Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government (and a founder of the World Bank’s Justice for the Poor program).

The panelists spoke not only about post-conflict development but about how prevention is equally important; countries with weaker institutions are at 50% higher risk of conflict. Robert Jenkins in particular spoke about the importance of countering violent extremism, and the need to address the rising youth bulge and their demands for jobs and dignity. He emphasized how post-conflict development is in itself conflict prevention, and that it is a lot cheaper to prevent a war than to be in war. There were also discussions about aid coordination and how to improve the response of the international community, including donors and major institutions.

Click here to download a video of the first panel

Finally, our second panel was titled Developing Stability and Security: Post-Conflict Security Sector and Justice Reform, and focused largely on the rule of law aspects of post-conflict rebuilding. Panelists were: Angela Conway, Director of the Middle East & North Africa (MENA) Division, American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative; Jean-Marie Kamatali, Assistant Professor of Law, Ohio Northern University College of Law; and Vivek Maru, Founder and CEO, Namati. The panel was moderated by David Marshall, Senior Rule of Law Advisor, New York Office, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.

This panel provided a fascinating look into justice systems in countries arising from conflict, with case studies from Sierra Leone, South Sudan, and Rwanda, among other places. The group had a discussion about what ‘rule of law’ actually means, and why it is important in post-conflict nations. Vivek Maru particularly emphasized the importance of the model used by Timap for Justice and other grassroots organizations in countries arising from conflict, where the formal justice system often lacks capacity; this model utilizes grassroots, community paralegals to provide justice to ordinary people quickly on issues such as criminal justice, land disputes, and citizenship. He emphasized how important it is to support and expand such projects to ensure justice in countries such as Sierra Leone, and how such a method promotes the rule of law. David Marshall spoke about his work with the UN in South Sudan, and how there can be such a disconnect between ‘rule of law’ and ‘human rights’ practitioners within the UN and other institutions. Angela Conway spoke about the ABA Rule of Law initiative’s programs around the world and in Libya, Iraq, Egypt, and the Gulf. Finally, Jean-Marie Kamatali discussed his personal and professional experiences with the Rwandan genocide, and how it can be incredibly difficult to rebuild trust in such an environment, and how transitional justice and accountability processes can promote rebuilding the rule of law.

Click here to download a video of the second panel.

Contact Symposium Chair, Akhila Kolisetty (akolisetty [at] jd15.law.harvard.edu) for more information!

November 7, 2014November 7, 2014

‘Humanitarian and NBA Superstar Dikembe Mutombo talks about his development work around the globe’

Everyday Harvard Law School students have many options to attend talks organized by different organizations. On Oct. 23, LIDS, International Legal Studies and the Harvard African Law Association brought in former basketball star Dikembe Mutombo. As expected, the room was packed. Of course, his basketball career is fascinating, from a person without any previous experience in basketball he became one of the top stars of the NBA, but what I am most impressed with is his work of the court.

In 1997 he opened a foundation to address the issues of health care and education, and in 2006 his foundation was able to open a modern hospital in Kinshasa. During his talk he highlighted some of the most urgent issues on the African continent: Ebola, health care and education issues. Having played basketball for 18 years, becoming a star and having constant attention of media, he used his powerful voice to call for changes. He raises funds continuously, and absolutely refuses to give up when it comes to helping the people of his home country, or any of the other countries where he serves as an NBA ambassador. I believe his strength comes from the moral reward he receives from people in many countries.

During his talk, Mr. Mutombo said: “Together we can change the world”, a phrase that seems overused and cliché. But coming from a person whose actions prove their words time and again, it was very powerful. He also highlighted that the opportunity to study at one of the best universities comes with a responsibility towards others. And as he finished, he left us with the parting words: “Try to get involved, do not stay aside saying it doesn’t concern me, there is no “their problem”, you have an opportunity and we need you”.

Very refreshing, very inspirational! Good luck in your endeavors Mr. Mutobmo!