Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen announced in late March that the nation was on target to move from the status of a low-income to a lower-middle-income nation by the end of 2013, ranking it the 15th country that obtained high economic growth in the world in the last 10 years.

An owner of a small sundries shop in Kampong Chhnang in Central Cambodia. Small businesses like this one serve as the backbone of the country’s sustainable economy. Photo/Karl Grobl

However, the global economic crisis has had an adverse impact on the Cambodian economy since the end of 2008. In 2009, Cambodia’s growth hit the lowest level (2%) experienced in the last 15 years. The real GDP growth has started to pick up since 2010 and 2011, with 3.0 percent and 7.0 percent, respectively. According to the Ministry of Industry, Mine, and Energy, the industrial sector, which includes the agricultural, tourism, garment, and mineral industries, shared 30 percent of the GDP, up 6 percent from the past 18 years.

Historically, however, Cambodia has relied on the role of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) as the backbone of a sustainable economy. Generally in Cambodia when we talk about SME economic activities, we are in fact talking about micro-small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), as out of the more than 500,000 economic establishments or enterprises counted in the 2011 Cambodia Economic Census, some 493,000 of them employ only one to 10 employees.

Prime Minister Hun Sen said in June 2010 when he announced the Rectangular Strategy Phase II, Cambodia’s main socio-economic policy agenda for the Fourth Legislature of the National Assembly (2008-2013), that SMEs are one of the angles of the strategy which government is committed to promoting.

Growth in the number of MSMEs could help expand the economy, create more jobs, facilitate Foreign Direct Investment, and enlarge the tax collection base. The 2011 census shows that more than 500,000 economic establishments were engaged in economic activities, employing more than 1.6 million laborers or approximately 20 percent of the total Cambodian labor force.

The best way to boost MSMEs is to encourage private sector development and support their expansion. Micro enterprises, mainly in the provinces, have the potential to grow to become small- medium-sized enterprise. However, this growth may not be realized if there are too many constraints.

For almost 10 years, The Asia Foundation has been working with MSMEs in Cambodia to help create a more productive, enabling environment at the provincial level; advocating for an improved business environment; improving the ability of Cambodia’s provincial MSMEs to compete in regional and world markets; and increasing the understanding of the benefits of MSME development in the local economy. Through different program activities such as subnational dialogues between public and private actors, surveys, and researches on impediments to growth, we found that constraints include lack of access to information, unclear and burdensome regulations, poor relationships with public authorities, lack of technological capacity in production, and most importantly, limited access to financing for business expansion. Despite these challenges, there have been a large number of new enterprises that opened their doors for business recently. Findings show that from 2009 to 2011, 34 percent of all total establishments had just started their business in those two years.

According to the National Institute of Statistics (NIS), around 72 percent of Cambodian enterprises are family-run businesses with one to three employees (2009). Out of 505,134 enterprises, only 3.5 percent were registered at the Ministry of Commerce in 2011. This means that the majority of enterprises are in the informal sector, effectively preventing them from accessing finance because banks and monetary financial institutions require SMEs to have legal status to be eligible to apply for a loan. As a result, SMEs rely on personal savings and informal sources for starting up or expanding their businesses. The primary reason for SMEs maintaining their informal status is the perception that standard accounting practices are complicated and unnecessary. Additionally, some SMEs prefer to keep informal financial records because it allows them to conceal their real profits and revenues from tax authorities.

Although there are policies in place, implementation still has a long way to go. Cambodia’s government should play an active role in connecting SMEs to the export sector by providing incentives to export firms to find local partners; benchmarking certain standards or priority areas for export growth; providing market, management and technical consultancy; and enhancing awareness of local SMEs to suppliers through tour organizing, workshops, or seminars. To reach its lower-middle income status and beyond, Cambodia’s small businesses must be given a fair environment to reach their full potential and grow.

The Asia Foundation’s work with SMEs in Cambodia is supported by the U.S. Agency for International Development, Australian Agency for International Development, New Zealand Aid Programme, and the Danish International Development Agency.

Khut Inserey is The Asia Foundation’s senior program officer in Cambodia. He can be reached at ikhut@asiafound.org. The views and opinions expressed here are those of the individual author and not those of The Asia Foundation.

When we hear about the current slow pace of negotiations between the government of the Philippines and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, we can lose sight of the many concrete achievements made over the years.

As peacemakers on both sides of the negotiating table try to learn lessons from past peace efforts, two institutions in particular established in the past decade stand out:  the Bangsamoro Development Agency, which is currently working on a medium-term Bangsamoro Development Plan, and the Bangsamoro Leadership and Management Institute, which works for “ideologically-oriented and spiritually accountable Bangsamoro leaders and managers who will utilize political and social-economic knowledge and skills.” These institutions are meant to avoid a situation, ever possible in post-conflict situations, where incoming leadership from a revolutionary movement does not know how to operate in a demilitarized governance system.

During the period that these accomplishments were made, since 2001, Malaysia has acted as Facilitator of the GPH-MILF negotiations. This role can be controversial, particularly in light of well-publicized events such as the crisis in Sabah. But there are quieter, less well-known aspects of Malaysia’s involvement, such as assistance from the Malaysian Technical Cooperation Programme (MTCP), a crucial part of the Malaysian government’s thrust toward south-south cooperation. More than 20,000 participants from 140 countries have participated in the various programs administered under the MTCP since its inception in 1980. The program continues to draw interest and participation from a multitude of countries, ranging from the Africa, Europe, Latin America, and Oceania.  Nevertheless, qualitatively, the MTCP has a decidedly Southeast Asian focus. Seven of the top 10 countries in 2012 are located in this region. Malaysia provides assistance upon the request from prospective partner countries, and the initiative for cooperation begins with the recipient countries. In short, the program is demand driven.

Malaysia is not typically seen as a “donor” in discussions of overseas development assistance (ODA), nor does Malaysia use that term to describe its development cooperation with other countries. Malaysian assistance to other countries is part of a wider trend of “new development actors” working to extend assistance overseas, often in ways that more traditional donors (the U.S., UK, or Australia) might not do. Therefore, unlike conventional foreign assistance programs, which are often linked to donor values and priorities, MTCP strives to represent an approach of “prosper thy neighbour” and “mutual benefit” in its partnerships. This approach has been applied with regard to Muslim Mindanao.

The April 27 launching of an association of Bangsamoro graduates of the MTCP is an important occasion, given the need for a cadre of trained professionals to implement by 2016 the transition to a Bangsamoro as envisioned in the Framework Agreement signed in October 2012. The Moro Islamic Liberation Front, and the Bangsamoro generally, will need to look at an expanded talent pool beyond current employees of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM – which will be replaced by the new Bangsamoro) and those currently active in the MILF-led transition. An alumni association that taps the 59 MCTP trainees is an ideal beginning. A similar pool of a total of 326 young people has over the years been supported by USAID to undergo a training in public administration followed by participation in the Congressional Internship Programs for Young Mindanao Leaders (CIPYML), and AusAID has the Philippines Australia Human Resource and Organisational Development Facility that includes a focus on Mindanao. From such pools a “registry” of potential Bangsamoro leaders and managers (both current ARMM civil servants and potential new ones) can be developed. Such a database can be drawn upon as preparations for a Bangsamoro Transitional Authority – perhaps in 2015 – move forward.

A strong cadre of civil servants is particularly important inasmuch as the Framework Agreement for the Bangsamoro specifies that the Bangsamoro will have a “ministerial” form of government – a parliamentary system rather than the “presidential” system of separation of powers in both the national and local Philippine government. Rather than a chief executive (e.g., a mayor, governor, or president) elected separately from the legislature for a fixed term, the new Bangsamoro will have a chief executive elected by the legislature for as long as the executive retains the confidence of the legislature. A cabinet will be appointed from the legislature (in some parliamentary systems cabinet members retain their legislative seats; in others they resign to serve in the cabinet).

The point here is that, as the Framework Agreement says, once there is a ministerial form of government, “The Bangsamoro Transition Authority may reorganize the bureaucracy into institutions of governance appropriate thereto.”  In presidential systems, typically the chief executive appoints many layers of the bureaucracy:  in the Philippines, this includes cabinet secretaries, undersecretaries, assistant secretaries, and even directors. In parliamentary systems, typically just the top one or two political leaders of a cabinet department are political appointees; the rest (up to the very top level) are permanent civil servants. A reason for this difference is that in a parliamentary system the duration of an executive government is uncertain – it is only in power as long as it retains the confidence of the legislature. Rather than fixed terms, and fixed intervals between elections, there is uncertainty. An election can be called any time that a government cannot sustain support from the elected members of the legislature. Thus, continuity of services and processes in the bureaucracy rests in the top-level bureaucrats.

In the process of setting up the Bangsamoro Transition Authority to replace the ARMM, the average ARMM civil servant is being assured of retention (as long as they are not “ghosts“). But the opportunity to set up a senior civil service is one that the MILF can use to help instantiate its vision of a Bangsamoro beyond the regular election in 2016. The MILF has repeatedly stated that it is open to other forces winning in 2016, but a well-functioning civil service will help ensure that the post-2016 Bangsamoro serves the citizens of the region well.

Steven Rood is The Asia Foundation’s country representative in the Philippines, and represents the Foundation as part of the International Contact Group for the GPH-MILF negotiations. He can be reached at srood@asiafound.org. The views and opinions expressed here are those of the individual author and not those of The Asia Foundation.

Against the background of Mongolia’s famous blue sky, around 1,215 delegates from 104 countries gathered in Ulaanbaatar to participate in the 7th Ministerial Conference of the Community of Democracies (CD) from April 27- 29, 2013, organized under Mongolia’s Presidency of the CD, which started in July 2011.

1,215 delegates from 104 countries gathered in Ulaanbaatar to participate in the 7th Ministerial Conference of the Community of Democracies. Photo/Tenzing Paljor

After an opening ceremony on April 27 led by Mongolian Prime Minister N. Altankhuyag, who highlighted the country’s democratic achievements and a group picture in front of the Chinggis Khaan statue at Sukhbaatar square, participants broke off to attend the fora of the five CD pillars: Civil Society, Youth, Parliamentary, Women, and Business. The Asia Foundation, through the USAID-funded “Supporting Mongolia’s Presidency of the Community of Democracies” Project, provided assistance to both the Parliamentary and Women’s forums.

At the joint meeting on the final day, chaired by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Mongolia, President Tsakhia Elbegdorj spoke of his country’s long road to democracy as well as how new democratic practices such as direct democracy and citizen participation increasingly are gaining momentum in Mongolia. He reiterated Mongolia’s role as a friend and its willingness to assist other countries that are transitioning to democracy. Thailand’s Prime Minister, Yingluck Shinawatra, spoke about the democratic struggles that her country has undergone and emphasized that these are not yet over, and Daw Aung San Suu Kyi expressed her gratitude for the support of the international community to the people of Burma in their fight for democracy, emphasizing that Burma has made the choice to transition towards democracy but still has a long way to go to become a full-fledged democracy. She also reminded that democracy brings with it not only rights, but also responsibilities and should be seen as a continuous learning process. She was later presented with the Geremek award in remembrance of the late Professor Bronislaw Geremek, one of the co-founders of the CD. Other speakers included Nobel Prize Laureate Tawakkol Karman from Yemen, UN Under-Secretary General, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State, Bill Burns, the High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security, Baroness Catherine Ashton, and the Vice President of Nigeria, Namadi Sambo.

During a plenary session on “Threats against Civil Society and Freedom of Expression,” several speakers outlined the worrisome trend by which many governments around the world are imposing restrictions on civil society and the use of internet. Parallel thematic sessions were held on “Democracy Education,” “Corruption and other Threats to Democracy,” “Arab Spring after 2 Years: Lessons and Challenges,” “Democracy and the MDGs,” and “Online and Press Freedom.”

Journalists interview the Minister of Health, N. Udval, at the 7th Ministerial Conference of the Community of Democracies. Photo/Tenzing Paljor

The Parliamentary Forum for Democracy (PFD) provided a space for legislators to share their experiences and best practices. This is just what a legislator from Libya was seeking. He noted how during the country’s recent revolution, freedom was the only concern; now his fellow parliamentarians face the harder challenge of building institutions and practices in line with the democratic values he and his fellow citizens fought for.

This year’s PFD focused on the debilitating effects of corruption. Legislators heard how corruption is a complex issue, resulting from weaknesses in laws, regulations, monitoring, enforcement, deterrence, institutions, and the political will to address it. Participants created a five-point plan for parliamentarians to address corruption:

• An anti-corruption paradigm shift to place more emphasis on the outcomes and results of anti-corruption efforts rather than focusing on the laws and institutions that address anti-corruption;

• Coalition strengthening among parliamentary and anti-corruption networks;

• Peer-to-peer review by parliamentarians across countries to allow for informal comment and positive advice on how a state can improve its anti-corruption efforts;

• Ensuring access to information legislation allows for citizen monitoring of all aspects of government income and expenditure; and

• Ending secrecy clauses in government-private sector contracts.

The Women’s Forum, organized by the Women’s Caucus of Parliamentarians, the National Committee on Gender Equality and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, focused this year on the challenges women face in political representation at the national and local level, challenges still common in many of the countries represented. Parallel sessions on “Democracy and Women’s Socio-Economic Rights and Empowerment,” “Women’s Role in Preventing Corruption and Promoting Transparency,” “Democratizing and Engendering Culture,” and “Stronger Systems, Institutions and Processes for Stronger Voices” provided a platform for further discussion on women’s positive role in addressing issues such as poverty, human rights violations, conflicts, and corruption.

The forum developed a statement calling for action by the members of the CD in four key areas:

• Endorsing women’s property rights, ensuring access to finance, and ensuring equal wages, as well as recognition of unpaid work;

• Increasing research and independent monitoring of the impact of corruption using a gender lens, and strengthening of women’s anti-corruption networks;

• Creation of a culture of gender equality, free from gender-based stereotypes and gender-based violence in all sectors of society, including media, education, and domestic life; and

• Increasing and honoring gender quotas for elected and nominated positions within national and local governments and political parties, and actions to ensure fair financing of political campaigns of women and men in part through campaign finance and political party reform, including political party financing.

After the fora, plenary sessions were held on “Harnessing Open Governance for Democracy,”  “Supporting Democratic Transitions: Insights from the CD Task Forces in Moldova and Tunisia and Lessons for Myanmar and Kyrgyzstan,” and “Women and Democracy.” At the closing session, representatives of each of the five pillars of the Community of Democracies presented the resolutions prepared during the different fora and the Ulaanbaatar Declaration of the CD was adopted. Mongolia also handed over its presidency of the CD to El Salvador, which will assume leadership on July 1, 2013.

Mongolia can look back at a very successful presidency over the last two years, during which it gave new impetus to the CD and was able to make significant progress in the priority areas of its presidency. The 7th Ministerial Conference provided an opportunity to showcase to the world the important progress Mongolia has made since its democratic transition in 1990 and share important lessons learned with current and aspiring democracies around the world.

Watch a new video, developed by The Asia Foundation, that features interviews with Mongolians across the country on what democracy means for them, how democracy has developed since Mongolia’s democratic transition, and views on the CD. The video has been produced in support of Mongolia’s Presidency of the CD through funding from the Embassy of the United States in Mongolia. The Asia Foundation was the first international nonprofit organization to be invited into Mongolia following the democratic transition in 1990. This year marks the 20th anniversary of the Foundation in Mongolia since it opened its office on October 1, 1993.

Meloney C. Lindberg is The Asia Foundation’s country representative in Mongolia, Jeremy Gross is a Foundation consultant based in Indonesia who has worked in Mongolia to support the Ministerial Conference, and Tirza Theunissen is the program and operations manager. They can be reached at mlindberg@asiafound.org, jg1@cbn.net.id, and ttheunissen@asiafound.org, respectively.

Cambodia announced two major bilateral trade agreements last month, with the Philippines and Thailand, that are expected to further expand the country’s rice export sector. Over the last few years, Cambodia has emerged as a major rice exporter in the region, due in large part to the Royal Government of Cambodia’s recent expansion of its agricultural sector.

Despite positive development, compared to neighboring countries with similar weather and soil conditions, Cambodia’s paddy rice yield remains relatively low. Photo/Karl Grobl

Agriculture, led by rice farming, contributes to roughly a third of the country’s GDP and has immense potential for strengthening Cambodia’s economic growth, accelerating poverty reduction, and improving the living standard of its citizens. As part of this agenda, in 2010, the RGC adopted a new Policy Paper on Paddy Production and Rice Export, better known as the Rice Policy, to promote diversification of Cambodia’s economic sectors by catalyzing growth in paddy rice production and milled rice export to match the growth seen in the garment and service sectors. In his keynote address at the policy’s launch, Prime Minister Samdech Hun Sen said: “The policy aims to ensure that we grab the rare opportunity to develop Cambodia in the post global financial and economic cataclysm.”

If Cambodia’s rice export sector were to reach its full potential, it could produce 3 million tons of milled rice, with the total export value amounting to $2.1 billion (approximately 20% of the GDP) and an estimated additional $600 million (approximately 5% of the GDP) to the national economy. It would also boost employment and income for agricultural farmers who make up more than 70 percent of the population living in rural areas.

Despite positive development, compared to neighboring countries with similar weather and soil conditions, Cambodia’s paddy rice yield remains relatively low. In 2006, the average yield was 2.6 tons per hectare, while Thailand, Laos, and Vietnam achieved 2.8 tons, 3.5 tons, and 4.9 tons, respectively.

The underutilization and non-usage of arable land is a huge deterrent to the industry’s growth. Most Cambodian farmers cultivate paddy rice once per year during the rainy season, while farmers in Vietnam’s delta region cultivate 3.5 times annually. Such low productivity is mainly a result of high energy prices and poor transportation infrastructure. For example, in the low elevation Mekong plain, petroleum products are generally used to pump water into irrigation canals, which makes it too expensive for farmers to plant multiple crops a year. Moreover, rural areas pay a much higher rate (30-90 cents per kWh) than those living in urban centers (20 cents). In contrast, farmers in Vietnam only pay about 10 cents per kWh.

As a relatively new player in the milled rice market, Cambodia faces a steep learning curve. However, with a surplus of 3.5 million tons of paddy rice, Cambodia has the potential to soon be among the top five milled rice exporters in the world. Photo/Karl Grobl

Poor transport and infrastructure such as roads, railways, warehouses, and handling equipment also increase costs for farmers. To transport one ton of rice on a 100 km road, Cambodian farmers must spend $15, while their counterparts in Thailand and Vietnam pay $4 and $7.50, respectively. The lack of handling equipment in one of the main ports, the Sihanouk-Ville Port, is also a major constraint for the export of large quantities of milled rice. In addition, lack of access to and high cost of credit decreases domestic economic value-added and hinders milled rice export, presenting an obstacle for rice millers to stockpile paddy rice.

According to the Rice Policy, If Cambodia is to export 3 to 4 million tons of milled rice per year, it has to produce at least 10 to 11 million tons of paddy rice. In fact, in 2012, Cambodia enjoyed a surplus of more than 4.7 million in paddies, according to the Ministry of Agriculture Forestry and Fishery. Yet, official figures from the Ministry of Commerce showed that it only exported 200,000 tons of milled rice last year, or only 10 percent of its full capacity.

To better understand the bottlenecks in the rice sector, The Asia Foundation, in partnership with the AusAID-funded program, “Cambodia Agricultural Value Chain” (CAVAC), hosted a series of consultative forums last year in three provinces – Kampong Thom, Kampot, and Takeo – with stakeholders from the private sector (farmers, seed producers, agro-business owners, exporters) and the public sector (Ministries of Agriculture, Commerce, and Water Resources Management, provincial governors, provincial departments of line ministries, and local authorities). Approximately 370 participants attended the workshops and discussed how to create business-friendly environments (i.e., competitiveness and productivity, access to finance, access to markets), and the technical aspects of rice production (use of fertilizers and insecticides, seed categories, and availability of water sources). The insights were frank and eye-opening.

Although the challenges are significant, the opportunities for the sector are greater. Dr. Hang Chuon Naron, Secretary of State for the Ministry of Economy and Finance, optimistically predicted that the RGC can achieve its target for milled rice: “With regards to RGC’s rice export target in 2015, we may achieve up to 80 percent of the 1 million tons planned. This should include the milled rice to Vietnamese, Thai, and non-EU markets.”

Implementing a strategic framework like the Rice Policy is just the beginning. To increase the paddy rice production to meet market demand and promote the export of milled rice, the government must initiate and support a host of reforms in partnership with the private sector. For instance, to solve the issue of credit shortages for buying and processing paddy rice, the government can provide incentives to commercial banks to increase the loan portfolio for agriculture.

At the end of the day, the RGC must keep the farmers themselves in mind. Introducing new technologies or improving agricultural practices can only go so far if they are not accepted and adopted by farmers. Donors and NGOs can play a pivotal role in providing support and facilitating the successful implementation of new policies and projects aimed at improving the agricultural value chain.

As a relatively new player in the milled rice market, Cambodia faces a steep learning curve. However, with a surplus of 3.5 million tons of paddy rice (equivalent to 2 million tons of milled rice), Cambodia has the potential to soon be among the top five milled rice exporters in the world. More importantly, growth in the agricultural sector will translate into more economic opportunities for Cambodia’s vast rural population. While not a silver bullet, the success of the rice sector is an exciting and potentially crucial driver in Cambodia’s prosperous and equitable development.

Khut Inserey is The Asia Foundation’s senior program officer in Cambodia. He can be reached at ikhut@asiafound.org. The views and opinions expressed here are those of the individual author and not those of The Asia Foundation.

The conference in the Asian Approaches to Development Cooperation dialogue series convened in Seoul, South Korea, this month, and brought together development experts and senior government officials to discuss climate change mitigation, green growth, and adapting to and building resilience to natural disasters. This dialogue series, co-organized by The Asia Foundation and the Korea Development Institute (KDI), brings together both “emerging” and “traditional” development actors to discuss international development challenges. This year’s focus on effective cooperation for deterring the impacts of climate change was launched in Seoul, fittingly, as South Korea is playing a leading role in low-carbon development in the Asia-Pacific region.

According to the UN, boosting global investments in renewable energy to $630 billion by 2030 would create at least 20 million additional jobs worldwide. South Korea is playing a leading role in the region’s green growth. Photo/Flickr user Toby Simkin

Green growth is a new policy paradigm for Asia and the Pacific that emphasizes ecologically sustainable economic progress and fosters low-carbon, socially-inclusive development. Its four pillars include sustainable production and consumption, green businesses, sustainable infrastructure, and fiscal incentives and reforms. “Growing green” means implementing more eco-efficient and profitable production, producing less pollution and waste in the process, and prioritizing the environment as essential to long-term social and economic development goals.

In July 2009, South Korea announced its “National Strategy for Green Growth” through 2050, providing a blueprint for how to shift its economic structure away from energy-intensive industries that have driven the majority of the development paths in Asia. The target goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent from a business-as-usual path by 2020, and increase the country’s renewable energy to 11 percent of total energy supplies by 2030.

With initial funding of $83.6 billion (representing 2 percent of GDP), South Korea’s first Five-Year Plan for Green Growth 2009-2013 has successfully turned strategy into concrete and operational policy initiatives toward achieving green growth and resource efficiency. South Korea’s government announced plans to continue making investments in innovative, low-carbon technologies for renewable energy, waste management, public transportation and construction, and to create enough new jobs in these sectors to offset the loss of employment in current carbon-intensive industries, such as mining, petroleum refining, and fossil fuel power generation.

In terms of development cooperation, South Korea has increased its development assistance budget since 2000 by 6.5 times, to approximately $1.3 billion in 2011, and has pledged to boost financing of regional renewable energy, conservation, and development projects to 30 percent of the total aid budget by 2020. Already, the Korean government installed a Communications, Ocean, and Meteorological Satellite system to improve Sri Lanka’s disaster preparedness by allowing officials to better share data, analysis, and forecasting capability. The system is part of the East Asia Climate Partnership, an initiative announced in 2008 and funded by the Korea International Cooperation Agency (KOICA) to share South Korea’s knowledge and technology resources in green growth, climate change adaptation and improved resource management to developing countries. KOICA has also pledged to build reservoirs, irrigation channels, and treatment facilities that will clean, recycle, and better manage water resources needed to effectively sustain agricultural production in the Philippines, which has decreased dramatically due to recent sustained droughts.

South Korea is also playing a leading role in green-growth policy advising. The Global Green Growth Institute (GGGI), founded in 2010 as a Korean NGO and since established as a treaty-based intergovernmental organization, works to advance the practice and theory of green growth by supporting the development, implementation, and diffusion of green growth strategies in developing and emerging countries, including in the least-developed countries in Asia. GGGI involves both state and non-state actors, such as other international organizations, NGOs, private companies, and research institutes.

According to a United Nations report on green growth, boosting global investments in renewable energy to $630 billion by 2030 would create at least 20 million additional jobs worldwide, making it a much larger source of employment than today’s fossil energy industry. One of the most interesting but least reported aspects of the current economic recovery effort is that over two-thirds of global green stimulus has in fact been committed in the Asia-Pacific, led by Australia, China, South Korea, and Japan.

Indeed, South Korea’s green growth strategy was highlighted throughout the AADC dialogue with representatives from other emerging economies in the region, notably China, India, and Malaysia, to share its successes on enacting renewable energy policy, implementing low-carbon transportation, and employing financial incentive for industries to make reforms to achieve green growth goals. Reflected in part by its leadership in this area, South Korea has been chosen as the home of the newly established Green Climate Fund, the multilateral financial mechanism recently created to support the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change adaptation and mitigation efforts.

At the 2010 G20 Seoul Summit, South Korea’s Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Kim Sung-han, declared that “many issues today require unprecedented international cooperation. Solving today’s complex challenges will require ‘middle powers’ to play a greater, more active role. Through various initiatives, such as its programs in green growth and development cooperation, South Korea has demonstrated the influence middle powers are having on global governance and that they may be best suited to facilitate consensus building and revitalize momentum for cooperation.”

Kourtnii S. Brown is a program officer for The Asia Foundation’s Environment Programs in San Francisco, and attended the AADC conference in Seoul. She can be reached at kbrown@asiafound.org. The views and opinions expressed here are those of the individual author and not those of The Asia Foundation.

People were standing up and sitting down, intense negotiations were underway, funding decisions were being made, and a lot of commotion was coming from a crowd of over 300 policymakers, scientists, and practitioners from over 40 countries. We are gathered in Dhaka, Bangladesh, for the Seventh Annual International Conference on Community-Based Adaptation to Climate Change (CBA7), and were playing games meant to capture and simplify the multitude of complex factors that go into decision-making for preparing for and responding to climate change impacts, among them: when and how much to invest in disaster preparedness measures while experiencing the cost of damages when disaster strikes.

The conference began with opening remarks by Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, who called for global and immediate action on climate change, highlighting the extreme vulnerability Bangladesh faces to its impacts: flooding, drought, sea level rise, salinity intrusion, and severe storms. Indeed, Bangladesh is the world’s most vulnerable country to climate change. In response, Bangladesh has become a leader in its experience and efforts to adapt to the impacts of climate change. The government has contributed nearly $350 million of its own funds to its Climate Change Trust Fund, and communities have been adapting to climate change for years, experimenting with what does and doesn’t work. But challenges remain, and current efforts are focused on bridging the gap between government and civil society, and increasing the role of local government.

The theme for this year’s conference addresses the governance of community-based adaptation (CBA) and mainstreaming CBA into national and local planning. But this is easier said than done – in order to achieve holistic governance on climate change, it needs to be incorporated into all aspects of development considerations and decision-making, which can be a daunting and complicated task. Some of the many issues we are discussing include: how is climate change integrated and streamlined into all facets of government development planning, including agriculture, health, infrastructure, environment, and education? How are all people accounted for, including women, children, and vulnerable groups? How can disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation initiatives be coordinated? And importantly, how can adaptation initiatives effectively be monitored and evaluated?

Climate change scenario game developed developed for ACCRA and played with local government officials in Uganda, Mozambique, and Ethiopia. It distills competing factors in decision-making for investments in agriculture, health, infrastructure, energy, and education in light of the impacts from natural disasters. Photo/Lisa Hook

The climate change games, co-developed and co-facilitated by Pablo Suarez from Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre, work in practical application with communities, farmers, policy makers, and humanitarian workers trying to adapt to climate change. They use simple materials in a board-game format using dice, beans, and spin-wheels, and are facilitated by trained practitioners who help translate the game dynamics into the real world complexities of climate change decision-making. The games distill complex issues and considerations to support local government decision-makers as they attempt to integrate climate change into their own development planning. They are helping to reframe engrained approaches to development planning to anticipate a range of future scenarios as a result of climate change.

This includes understanding the tradeoffs made in real-world decisions when addressing climate change, for example, the tradeoff between now vs. later and the tradeoff between individual vs. community interests. In the real world, decision making tends to favor a current “now” perspective, but the games help participants inhabit the future, and experience the consequences of inaction. Additionally, individually-focused decisions tend to be made in the short-term to receive the greatest benefits, but over the long-term collective investment increases the likelihood of withstanding shocks.

Here at the CBA7, the games provided a new way for us to interact and learn from one another – beyond the usual power point presentations. This format engages active participation, where everyone is able to ask, challenge, and learn from the process simultaneously. Our team quickly came together to decide when to invest in early warning systems for natural disasters before we rolled our dice, the outcome of which determined the impact from a natural disaster, and the resulting loss of our collective funds. The experience of anticipation, fast decision-making for investments, uncertainty, and loss quickly became very personal and emotionally charged, especially as the stakes were raised and probabilities of natural disasters were increased due to climate change.

In the end, the winning team succeeded by lobbying the game-appointed “local government” official for more “resources,” securing an advantage over other teams. But, this contributed to a valuable bigger-picture lesson: often, the systems meant to provide benefits to and support community-based adaptation do not reach their intended recipients, but are instead allocated for other interests. A lack of transparency and effective governance make accounting for these funds difficult to track, reinforcing the importance of effective, transparent, and participatory governance for valuable climate change resilience. Pablo concluded that “the games are designed to capture the incentives and disincentives in the real world, and the dynamics between immediate satisfaction and protection against potential future threats.” They are changing the nature of these dialogues.

Lisa Hook is a senior program officer for The Asia Foundation’s Environment Programs in San Francisco. She can be reached at lhook@asiafound.org. The views and opinions expressed here are those of the individual author and not those of The Asia Foundation.

As discussions on the federal budget and sequestration continue here in Washington, D.C., The Asia Foundation’s Washington office sponsored an event to discuss how various Asian nations are approaching and, in some cases, expanding their development assistance programs.

The two panels brought together seven experts representing senior government officials and policy specialists from five countries – Korea, China, India, Indonesia, and Japan – to discuss the development landscape in Asia at an event co-hosted by USAID. Although the series of discussions on “Asian Approaches to Development Cooperation” (AADC), a partnership between The Asia Foundation and the Korea Development Institute (KDI), has taken place since 2010, this was the first event in the U.S., and it was very well attended with over 100 participants at the half-day seminar.

On the first panel, Asian government representatives from Korea, India, Indonesia, and Japan each presented their country’s approach to development cooperation. These countries of course offered a range of experiences and objectives:  from Japan, with a well-established aid program, and Korea, the first country to transform from being an aid recipient to now an OECD DAC member and provider, to India, focused on South-South Cooperation, and Indonesia in the beginning stages of institutionalizing its cooperation program. Yet, despite these different perspectives, several similarities between the approaches emerged, including:

• Focus on Asia regionalism and an emphasis on helping neighboring countries;

• “Demand-driven” approach to providing technical assistance; and

• A strong interest in capacity-building and knowledge-sharing as part of their development cooperation strategies.

During the second panel, experts discussed challenges in light of the expiration of the global Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015. A wide range of issues were presented, including inclusive growth, access to health and education, conflict mitigation, and improved security, and international policy coherence. Speakers also noted that large, emerging actors including China and India are looking beyond 2015 to 2020.

It was very clear that both the Asian participants and our co-hosts from USAID felt that the discussion was productive, provided a useful information sharing opportunity, as well as a chance to engage the development policy community, especially during the same week as the World Bank and IMF meetings in Washington. USAID’s assistant administrator for Asia, Nisha Biswal, expressed a desire to learn and engage with Asian emerging donors to develop new partnerships. Participants noted that the “traditional donors also need to learn from emerging donors.”

As traditional development agencies  such as USAID and UNDP rethink their role and reflect on their assistance programs and the way forward, it’s clear that the Asian emerging actors are excited to be “giving back” and have much to contribute to this discussion. The Foundation is pleased to offer a platform through AADC where these critical issues can be discussed and where Asian solutions to Asian problems can be highlighted.

Following the event in Washington, D.C., panelists travel to New York City to participate in discussions at the UN Secretariat. We will soon be posting a video which was live-streamed from the D.C. event. The Asian Approaches to Development Cooperation (AADC) dialogue series is a partnership between The Asia Foundation and the Korea Development Institute (KDI). This program in Washington, D.C., is organized by The Asia Foundation and USAID, with additional support from UNDP and AusAID.

Anna Bantug-Herrera is The Asia Foundation’s associate director in the Washington, D.C., office. She can be reached at abantugherrera@asiafound-dc.org. The views and opinions expressed here are those of the individual author and not those of The Asia Foundation.

Yesterday marked the 18th World Book and Copyright Day, first introduced by UNESCO in 1995, in celebration of books, authors, and the joys of reading. It’s also an occasion to reflect on the importance of education, especially as a driver of poverty reduction. The link between education and economic empowerment is undeniable; accordingly, governments, civil society, and the international donor community have made notable efforts to increase school enrollment and improve literacy rates around the world.

While literacy rates have improved vastly over the past decade in Cambodia, improvements in functional literacy are more uncertain. Photo/Karl Grobl

Despite advancements, an estimated 250 million children are still unable to read and write, and in some developing countries, 25-50 percent of students who have graduated from primary school cannot read a single sentence, according to the World Bank.

Unfortunately, Cambodia is no exception. While literacy rates have improved vastly over the past decade – according to the 2008 National Population Census, currently at about 78 percent among those aged 15 years or older – improvements in functional literacy (the ability to read, write, and calculate beyond basic skills) are more uncertain. In 1999, functional literacy was just 37 percent, in comparison to the basic literacy rate of 68 percent. Unsurprisingly, a third of Cambodians live below the national poverty line, which is 61 cents. Moreover, Cambodia’s improvement in literacy has not necessarily been equitable, with girls, the rural poor, and minorities still facing the most significant challenges.

The Royal Government of Cambodia (RGC) has been committed to expanding educational opportunities and is party to several international initiatives, including the Millennium Development Goals and UNESCO’s Education for All. Nationally, the Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sport (MoEYS), as part of its Education Strategic Plan 2009-2013, has prioritized expanding early childhood education, non-formal education, technical and vocational training, and access to secondary and post-secondary education. To address disparities in literacy rates, MoEYS has designed and implemented inclusive policies such as bilingual education in provinces like Rattanakiri and Mondulkiri with a large minority population, scholarships for girls and students representing other vulnerable groups, and non-formal education opportunities for youth and adults that are not integrated into the public school system.

While these initiatives have had positive impact, Cambodia’s education system still faces numerous hurdles, including issues related to governance and quality of services at subnational levels. Cambodia also faces growing demand for a labor force fluent in English. In 2008, only 5 percent of the population had working knowledge of the English language. Inadequate resources, such as textbooks and facilities, contribute to the problem. With the formation of the ASEAN Economic Community in 2015, which will establish a free trade zone among ASEAN member countries, English-language proficiency will be even more critical for Cambodia’s growth and development.

The Asia Foundation’s Books for Asia program, in partnership with the RGC and a network of NGOs, has distributed over 900,000 books and other educational materials to Cambodian universities, primary and secondary schools, NGOs, government ministries, and public libraries. Read more about Books for Asia in Cambodia.

Cham Soeun is a program officer for the Books for Asia program and Lisa H. Kim is program officer for The Asia Foundation in Cambodia. They can be reached at scham@asiafound.org and lkim@asiafound.org, respectively. The views and opinions expressed here are those of the individual authors and not those of The Asia Foundation.

Recent vituperative comments by the North Korean regime can normally be dismissed as the ravings of a state that either misinterprets their negative external impact, or as rhetoric that is intended for consumption by a remarkably unsophisticated internal audience. Yet amid this dross from North Korea there is often repeated a term that foreigners frequently neglect or dismiss and to which attention should be paid. That is the call for “dignity.” Indeed, this call for “dignity” is a common sentiment that is usually ignored but was included, for example, in the 2008 inaugural speech of President Lee Myong Bak, as part of his policy for a more prominent role for South Korea within the realm of international relations. More recently, Lieutenant General Qi Jianguo of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army in a January 2013 article in an official Chinese journal wrote, “If a nation loses its dignity, how can it speak of freedom?” Previously, the term was often used by the Burmese junta in its anti-foreign statements. It appears that the quest for “dignity” is a relatively common aspiration collectively amongst peoples who have felt diminished as a state, right down to the level of the individual.

It is perhaps significant that the term has been used by the leadership of states that in the past were humiliated by arrogant colonial rule, or in the case of China, the one hundred years of “semi-colonial” status. Unequal treatment, in treaties or otherwise, creates resentments and long memories. Such memories linger, and heightened nationalism on the side of the oppressed is a normal consequence.

“Dignity,” from the Latin dignitas – the inherent right to be valued or esteemed – is something more profound and important than “respect,” which itself is more substantive than “face,” which is often considered an Asian concept but in reality is a human universal desire for respectability. It is the basis on which much of our lives operate, or on which we hope that they would. Humans try to ensure dignity in our normal activities through protocols and good manners, means to codify dignity so that everyone understands what is expected, and thus dignity is maintained – we are being treated as we should. As established customs erode in globalized societies, such as the United States, these unofficial and often unarticulated rules are modified or ignored, leading to confusion. So, one can be accused of “dissing” someone – not providing the proper demeanor or response, and thus not providing the dignity sought. This can become more acute when cultures cross. Many African Americans during the 1992 Rodney King Riots in Los Angeles accused Korean businessmen of “dissing” them – destroying their dignity – by not looking them in the eye as one would do with an equal in American culture, even though direct eye contact between strangers is considered completely inappropriate in traditional Korean culture.

Unfortunately, this stated or inchoate cry for dignity in international relations is sadly often ignored. The stronger power usually overtly or indirectly destroys dignity by attempting to force conditions or acquiescence upon other governments for numerous reasons; they are often labeled as “evil empires,” “pariah regimes,” “rogue states,” or “outposts of tyranny.” However egregious their mistakes or violations of what have become (Western) international norms, those other governments, at least within the realm of normal bilateral relations, are deprived of the dignity that could potentially allow them to transform themselves on their own volition and at their own speed. They are not, of course, being treated as equals – with the dignity that one would expect from others. This dialectic is, in effect, paternalistic – the powerful parent chastising a child. In such circumstances, the public airing of such views, however justified, means that to acquire internal dignity – with or among their own peoples – the weaker government must respond negatively to such criticisms. For if it does not, that government has the potential to lose internal political legitimacy – dignity.

Public negative characterizations of such governments are designed to affect positive change of some sort, yet they can often have the opposite effect, though one opposed to this position might argue that the government in question does not have legitimacy to begin with. Yet that is not necessarily the case. External “pariah” status does not always equate to internal vilification. Authoritarian leaders can be popularly, and even fairly, elected.

Sometimes there are requests, even demands, for access to the elective process of a country. From the more benevolent “observer” status to that of “monitor,” implying, implicitly, that the state in question cannot be trusted to conduct fair elections, just as students are supervised during examinations to prevent cheating. Dignity is thus denied. This is not to argue that efforts should not be made to change individual government’s negative and/or abusive behavior, both domestically and internationally. Quiet arguments for change should be made when the effects of some governments’ actions are destructive. Incentives can be proffered, and negative responses discussed. But the use of the ill-phrased “carrots and sticks” approach is demeaning. As a former Burmese foreign minister said, “We are not donkeys.” So the phrase itself is another, and not a singular, example of the demeaning rhetoric used that in fact undermines the foreign policy goals it seeks to achieve. During wartime, some in the United States have claimed that if enough force is used, the “hearts and minds” of the people on the receiving end will follow. One wonders what evidence exists for such assumptions, especially when one recalls “shock and awe.” Indeed, the very opposite seems more than likely – suspicion and distrust will follow.

The use of sanctions for “benevolent purposes” against another state are often cited to convince the government in question to reform. Those who impose such sanctions no doubt have some powerful stimulus – either of a military or economic nature, or even moral suasions. The very act of advocating such sanctions or imposing them, however, rests on the underlying assumption that the particular state in question does not have the status, strength, moral position or concepts that would induce them to change on their own. However, the very act of imposing sanctions, in effect, deprives such governments of dignity. Furthermore, by implementing sanctions, is not the opportunity of achieving the desired goals limited? This position is nothing new in Western or other societies who have become, as others have sometimes pointed out, the ethical or political missionaries who are out to convert the unwashed heathens – those individuals or regimes who by their very status are lacking the dignity that only we can confer. To maintain internal dignity, regimes must go out of their way to deny such characterizations and to strike back with rhetoric that simply exacerbates the unpleasantness of the relationship. So these actions, in a good Hegelian way, produce the opposite reactions that defeat their purpose. Even some modern missionaries have learned that conversion by example is often more effective that verbally beating people around the head.

The need for dignity in international negotiations is an essential component for dealing with unpleasant or enemy regimes if one is to attain some of the objectives of such negotiations. This lesson, alas, is seldom learned.

This article was originally published in the East-West Center’s Asia Pacific Bulletin.

David I. Steinberg is Distinguished Professor of Asian Studies, School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University.

Mongolia sits on some of the world’s largest mineral deposits, primarily coal and copper, as well as rare earth and precious metals. While the country’s abundant resources have driven Mongolia to the top of Asia’s economic performers, the rapid growth has not happened without serious concern over the environmental impact from the country’s booming mining industry.

Artisanal mining offers traditional herders an alternative, viable income when they suffered livestock losses and thus economic difficulties during Mongolia’s catastrophic winter weather events. Photo/Matthew Pendergast

The good news is that Mongolia’s government is increasingly prioritizing green growth and environmental responsibility. In 2012, the government increased the mandate of the Ministry of Environment to include “Green Development,” and established a new National Green Development Strategy and action program to outline ways for each major economic sector to transition to a greener economy.

The formal mining sector in Mongolia is comprised of officially registered small- to large-sized mining companies that are conducting commercial operations and have obtained formal mining licenses from the government. The minerals extracted from the formal mining sector last year made up nearly 91.3 percent of all exports. Informal, artisanal mining, on the other hand, is made up of small-scale miners who have limited access to capital and/or technology but may obtain access to land to carry out mining activities. It is estimated that artisanal mining contributes $110 million annually to export revenues. Given the large-scale investments that well-resourced mining companies are able to make on environmental rehabilitation efforts, there are a number of excellent examples in Mongolia of best practices in environmental reclamation and rehabilitation efforts. Lesser known are the efforts underway in communities where small and artisanal mining is taking place.

Mine shafts dug by artisanal miners in Mandal soum. Photo/Srabani Roy

Artisanal and small-scale mining in Mongolia started to evolve in the 1990s when the country transitioned from a centrally planned to a market economy. In 1993, the government initiated its “Gold program” to promote development of the formal mining sector. This subsequently led to growth in artisanal mining which drove down unemployment by offering traditional herders an alternative, viable income when they suffered livestock losses and thus economic difficulties during Mongolia’s catastrophic winter weather events (known as dzuds). The artisanal mining sector initially suffered from a poor reputation as it was often considered illegal and associated with environmental and social problems, such as soil and water pollution, mined land that was not being rehabilitated, and crime. However, in 2010, with support from development organizations and civil society, a more robust policy and legal framework declared artisanal mining a legal occupation, which meant that artisanal miners could secure mining land and formalize their operations into official partnerships.

Outreach among artisanal mining communities to promote the use of environmentally friendly technologies and reclaim environmentally degraded land has helped improve the public perception about artisanal mining as a viable alternative livelihood option. Indeed, it is increasingly seen as a greener and more socially responsible sub-sector.

The Asia Foundation has worked on responsible resource issues in Mongolia since 2006, but has primarily focused on industrial mining. However, over the last few years, we have been working closely with artisanal miners, to give them a greater voice and knowledge base. Now, these miners participate in multi-stakeholders groups (which also include local authorities, mining companies, and community members) that provide guidance on responsible artisanal mining and a place to discuss concerns.

One of the most critical environmental issues surrounding artisanal mining is the rehabilitation of degraded land, characteristics of which may include large unfilled holes and/or tunnels, compacted soils, lack of vegetation, and polluted water and soil. In 2012, we partnered with a local environmental NGO to help develop a model artisanal and small-scale mining land reclamation project in Uyanga district, Uvurkhangai province – one of Mongolia’s mining areas with a large amount of un-reclaimed lands 490 km from the capital, Ulaanbaatar. We provided a training course for the NGO to work with 45 artisanal miners and undertake technical and biological reclamation of a two-hectare site, rehabilitating the land in conformity with the government’s reclamation standards.

Although the site was relatively small, the project has created local enthusiasm for reclamation in the area and heightened awareness on how to conduct rehabilitation effectively. An added strength is that the district governor is upholding it as a model for mine reclamation. At his insistence, mining companies operating in the jurisdiction are now required to visit the reclamation site (with the NGO representatives) to learn what can and must be done to properly reclaim their operations. The NGO provides a letter for the governor confirming that the mining company has seen and understood the process and work involved in mine reclamation; otherwise, local permission to mine in Uyanga district will not be provided.

Increasingly, artisanal miners who we’ve met with are recognizing the need to improve their environmental responsibility in order to have their profession accepted in their local communities, and also so that local authorities will be more compelled to officially provide them access to local land to mine. While the sector faces many challenges, if the environmental and social impacts are effectively managed, artisanal mining has the potential to provide sustainable livelihoods for many rural citizens in addition to its significant contributions to the Mongolian economy.

The activities related to artisanal and small-scale mining under the Foundation’s Engaging Stakeholders for Environmental Conservation (ESEC) program are implemented with the generous support of the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).

Meloney C. Lindberg is The Asia Foundation’s country representative in Mongolia and Bolormaa Purevjav is the program director for the Foundation’s ESEC program there. They can be reached at mlindberg@asiafound.org and bolormaa@asiafound.org, respectively. The views and opinions expressed here are those of the individual authors and not those of The Asia Foundation.