Poll Comments - Private Sector and Global Fund Decision Making

This poll was conducted June 12 - July 3, 2002

There is an apparent trend in international development towards major private sector companies having a seat at the policy and strategy tables alongside governments, NGOs and not-for-profits. This is a positive trend in international development.

Do you agree? Disagree? Unsure?

AGREE

"If private sector companies have a seat at such meetings , there is a much greater chance of their getting to hear the viewpoints of other stakeholders who are already in the game." [India]

"It demonstrates an all rounded commitment for international development and provides opportunities for the private sector and NGOs to understand and support each other's work better." [ ]

"Jobs are created by the private sector, not the public sector for the most part. Businesses need to realize that until they can play a greater role in helping the poor find livable employment, then nations cannot progress fully. Also, we in the nonprofit sector and public sector often are plagued by misconceptions and stereotypical beliefs about what the business sector is, how it operates, and how its people behave. Relationships cannot be nurtured if all players are not at the discussion table." [USA]

"It is a positive trend as all stakeholders in societies need to be involved in consultations. However, all views, including those of private sector players must be balanced alongside the wider societal priorities, not the case where private investment seems to dominate." [ ]

"This is a good trend, although these organizations tend to be behind in their development thinking. A good example are Paul O'Neill's naive comments from his recent trip to Africa. Still, their perspectives, resources, and role are needed. It will simply take time, though, for them to become more savvy and effective regarding these issues." [ ]

"Private companies are important players in development, especially those with charitable arms. I believe collaboration of concerned parties is the key to success and will benefit the people and humanity in general." [USA]

"Not sure what is meant by 'major' private sector companies. The private sector should definitely be part of policy and strategy debates and development processes but this involvement should include a representative balance of international, national and local companies including representatives for large, medium and small enterprises. Over-representation of transnationals for example would be extremely undesirable." [Uganda]

"We need all of the help we can get." [ ]

"Discussions must include all stakeholders for commitments to occur." [Colombia]

"Major private sectors companies are increasingly under pressure to account for their modus operandi. While their reason for taking a seat at policy and strategy tables is most probably finance-based, this involvment is the only way forward towards sustainable development. " [ ]

"International development policies and strategies affect international producers and consumers alike. The private sector as the leading force of production in today's global economy should therefore be represented at strategic levels of decision-making. Experience has shown that mere consultations by governments of leading private sector representatives are not always adequate for reaching sound policies and strategies. The private sector should be directly involve in reaching such decisions. However, private sector involvement in strategising international development issues should not be a licence for them to unduly influence global development policies for profits at the expense of citizens of the developing world." [ ]

"Private sector fuels major development & should participate in the decision-making process as well." [Ghana]

"Natural and welcome: time to get the "for profits" involved, at a macro level as well." [ ]

"As private capital flows surpass official flows to developing countries, private sector participation at the table becomes more necessary." [ ]

"Though the very basic motives of private sectore is self interest, they are now the motors of the world. So positive to allow them have a say in the policy development arena. In Africa paritcularly for the past 60 years Govenment and 30 Years NGOs have been making decisions, but to no avail. So a new hand may have some change, good to try." [Ethiopia]

"I am part of a global company in corporate America. As I write the word "America," I think I should have said "corporate world." Having also started an NGO in the US that sells only fair trade merchandise (70% of people making it are women supporting themselves and their children) and being active in peace with justice issues, I think there is a place for the private sector in international development. I applaud Bill Gates for the work his Foundation is doing and how he is getting other companies involved, i.e., with Kraft to provide vitamin enriched food. I know that having private corporation involved is controversial issue to many people. Having them at the policy and strategy table is even more controversial than providing food. I think the more important question is whether corporate financially independent individuals should try to influence policy and legislation. The WallStreet Journal ran an interesting article this week (June 17) on this topic. Does the UN mind that Ted Turner persuaded the US to ante up due. I honestly think there is less bureauracy in corporations than there is in religious groups (#1) and education institutions (#2). So why not take advantage of not only the money and connections, but the expertise that these individuals and the corporations have to offer. There are so many things that need to be done in international development. That's why the G-8 countries spent so much time arguing two years ago in Japan over whether digital divide or other things are more important. We have to work on development on multiple fronts. The July issue of MIT's Technology Journal has an interesting article on Ghana and the digital divide. They've made much progress especially compared to many of their African neighbors, but they still lack some basics--reliable power sources and telephone lines. Parts of India have the same problem. The issue is not whether private sector help is positive, the issue is channeling the help and coordinating it from all sources. There's way too much that needs to be done to leave a major contributor out of the equation. Inevitably, some private companies will use their leverage for their good and not think about the recipient. However, that happens in NGOs too. We need win-win approaches." [USA]

"Development will not work without this 'missing piece.'" [ ]

"We are in a global village, where all sectors should participate if we are to achieve positive results. Restricting participation to NGOs and not for profits organisation has only stunted development drive in the past years." [Nigeria]

"This is a positive trend as long as these companies are not able to inject their own agendas into the policy debates at hand." [ ]

"Yes I am satisfied with this." [India]

"Private sector is a key develpment stakeholder." [ ]

"The international aid business is characterised by extreme inefficiency and very low cost-benefit. One must only think that this is deliberate. What is required is a warm-heart-cold-head approach." [Zimbabwe]

DISAGREE [top]

"I see this as a further and dangerous step toward strengthening big business globally." [USA]

"It is not positive. In todays world, only those who are economic giants have the vioce. Does this mean those without strong economic base have nothing to contribute towards international development? And who speaks for them? Development is not, as long as policies made widen the gap between the have's and have not's!" [ ]

"When the government has financial concerns ruling it rather than concerns of the people's concerns, it no longer acts to serve the people; eventually the populace must revolt against such powers." [USA]

"Too open to abuse." [ ]

"This is exactly the consequence of the development community's failure to achieve its goals through its conventional methods. The private sector is responsible for social injustice that is an underlying cause of underdevelopment. Bringing the private companies in is a sign of surrunder." [ ]

"Since the purpose of private sector companies is to make a profit and not necessarily to serve the community, they should follow policy guidelines set by the public and non-prifit sectors, rather than aid in shaping tht policy. It would seem to be a clear conflict of interest to help shape policy. However, their interests could be identified as stakeholders, and observors, in the policy process." [Palestine]

"Multi-national companies are major forces in shaping today's world and development strategies are often trying to correct situations that MNCs have had a hand in creating. However, MNCs should not be invited to the table as an equal partner of governments or NGOs. The MNC goal of maximizing profits can often be at conflict with the goal of human development, and what saddens me is the increasing attempt by many development actors to approach human development from an business perspective where efficiency and cost-effectivess are a mantra and factors that are hard to quantify, yet key to overall human development, are unrecognized. Yes, MNCs must be addressed in developing strategies on international development, but they should not have an equal seat at the table." [ ]

"Very strongly disagree and feel that this is something which must be vehemently checked. Despite all the arguments of businesses knowing how to turn a profit and therefore being very efficient members of society there are just some areas where they have no role simply because of their objectives of having and needing to return high returns on investments. This in fact seems like a very dangerous trend and all the deep-seated fears of multinationals influencing government policy from everything to drilling in protected national lands to what genetically modified foods get imported into countries are brought to life. International development, poverty alleviation, and providing equal reproductive health care access to all are needs too sacred to have any partisan influencing factors interfere in at all." [Pakistan]

"Eventually, special interest will take priority in policies and strategies." [ ]

"Useful to have business inputs but caution on including companies who are striving to develop business opportunities and profits for themselves without any social objectives." [ ]

UNSURE [top]

"Major private sector companies already have a voice alongside governments. Presently government and public offices are generally occupied by people who are willing to take into account the interests of the major private sector companies, which already have the power to influence public opinion by mass media communication and propaganda strategies. The major private sector companies have many opportunities to influence public policies and take an action by partnerships in different well-fare projects. Whatever may be the case, our societies need nowadays a better balance between the public and private sectors in behalf of social justice, public well-fare and democracy. New opportunities should also be open to universities, non-profit organizations and the cultural and educational sectors in order to have a voice in public policies and other decisions taken at strategy tables alongside governments as well." [Brazil]