This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development-professionals-network/2013/feb/20/improving-asian-diaspora-insitutions
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| How to improve diaspora engagement | How to improve diaspora engagement |
| (7 months later) | |
| Policymakers in the Asia-Pacific region increasingly recognise the value that diaspora populations bring to development efforts at home. Some governments in the region have taken an extra step in institutionalising their engagement with the diaspora by creating special offices or directorates within government agencies. Within Asia, 14 government institutions were created specifically to engage diasporas on a formal basis, occupying different levels of government and exhibiting diverse priorities and degrees of organisation. | Policymakers in the Asia-Pacific region increasingly recognise the value that diaspora populations bring to development efforts at home. Some governments in the region have taken an extra step in institutionalising their engagement with the diaspora by creating special offices or directorates within government agencies. Within Asia, 14 government institutions were created specifically to engage diasporas on a formal basis, occupying different levels of government and exhibiting diverse priorities and degrees of organisation. |
| Countries like India have established ministries to address the needs of diaspora populations.Ministry for Overseas Indian Affairs was formed in 2004 to address the lack of government policy coordination on migration and to implement programmes that reach out to the Indian diaspora. Bangladesh and Sri Lanka also have established ministries to engage their diasporas. | Countries like India have established ministries to address the needs of diaspora populations.Ministry for Overseas Indian Affairs was formed in 2004 to address the lack of government policy coordination on migration and to implement programmes that reach out to the Indian diaspora. Bangladesh and Sri Lanka also have established ministries to engage their diasporas. |
| A few diaspora institutions in Asia fall short of full ministry standing but still report directly to the highest executive body and enjoy a fairly influential position within the government. For instance, China's Overseas Chinese Affairs Office, which among other duties operates two universities catering mainly to the Chinese diaspora, is uniquely positioned under the state council, the country's highest executive body. | A few diaspora institutions in Asia fall short of full ministry standing but still report directly to the highest executive body and enjoy a fairly influential position within the government. For instance, China's Overseas Chinese Affairs Office, which among other duties operates two universities catering mainly to the Chinese diaspora, is uniquely positioned under the state council, the country's highest executive body. |
| Similarly, the Philippines' Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO) is directly under the Office of the President. Established in 1980, the commission has a dual role of promoting both economic and cultural ties between the Philippines and its diaspora. The government also institutionalised diaspora engagement at the sub-ministry level by creating three special offices under the departments of labour and employment and foreign affairs. | Similarly, the Philippines' Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO) is directly under the Office of the President. Established in 1980, the commission has a dual role of promoting both economic and cultural ties between the Philippines and its diaspora. The government also institutionalised diaspora engagement at the sub-ministry level by creating three special offices under the departments of labour and employment and foreign affairs. |
| Diaspora engagement does not stop at the national level. Diasporas are often inclined to engage at the local level, usually in their place of origin, where they are familiar with the context and, in many cases, still have family ties. Some states in India, for instance, have diaspora offices, the most active of which can be found in Kerala and Gujarat. | Diaspora engagement does not stop at the national level. Diasporas are often inclined to engage at the local level, usually in their place of origin, where they are familiar with the context and, in many cases, still have family ties. Some states in India, for instance, have diaspora offices, the most active of which can be found in Kerala and Gujarat. |
| Some diaspora-engagement organisations are not clearly within the realm of government. In 1997, the South Korea government established the Overseas Koreans Foundation, a nonprofit organisation affiliated with the ministry of foreign affairs and trade. The foundation had a clear development mandate from the outset: to "utilise the capabilities of overseas Koreans for national development in line with its globalisation policy." | Some diaspora-engagement organisations are not clearly within the realm of government. In 1997, the South Korea government established the Overseas Koreans Foundation, a nonprofit organisation affiliated with the ministry of foreign affairs and trade. The foundation had a clear development mandate from the outset: to "utilise the capabilities of overseas Koreans for national development in line with its globalisation policy." |
| While many governments acknowledge the importance of diaspora engagement in development, many still lack the capacity to design effective policies and implement them on a meaningful scale. This explains the gap between schemes that look good on paper and truly effective policies and programmes that actually make a difference. Indeed, effective engagement almost always requires a concerted effort towards capacity building. | While many governments acknowledge the importance of diaspora engagement in development, many still lack the capacity to design effective policies and implement them on a meaningful scale. This explains the gap between schemes that look good on paper and truly effective policies and programmes that actually make a difference. Indeed, effective engagement almost always requires a concerted effort towards capacity building. |
| For many countries in Asia and elsewhere, the main challenges to effective engagement appear to centre on two issues: how best to obtain adequate funding and how to improve technical know-how. Governments serious about engaging diasporas have to commit to funding their efforts as fully as possible (and seeking funds from elsewhere to fill in remaining gaps) and to obtaining the operational knowledge and skills needed to pursue goals effectively. Indeed, for many governments, one of the most pressing challenges to diaspora engagement is how to support institutions that do not drain already limited public coffers while bringing in critical financial resources. | For many countries in Asia and elsewhere, the main challenges to effective engagement appear to centre on two issues: how best to obtain adequate funding and how to improve technical know-how. Governments serious about engaging diasporas have to commit to funding their efforts as fully as possible (and seeking funds from elsewhere to fill in remaining gaps) and to obtaining the operational knowledge and skills needed to pursue goals effectively. Indeed, for many governments, one of the most pressing challenges to diaspora engagement is how to support institutions that do not drain already limited public coffers while bringing in critical financial resources. |
| Ongoing monitoring, evaluation, and frequent adjustments should also be the foundation of any diaspora institution. Most appear to have placed significant resources at the front end while neglecting the feedback loop. Even if a government effectively facilitates emigrants' return or has built up an active network of diaspora members, it is crucial to monitor programme implementation, measure impact, and use findings to further improve engagement within and outside government. | Ongoing monitoring, evaluation, and frequent adjustments should also be the foundation of any diaspora institution. Most appear to have placed significant resources at the front end while neglecting the feedback loop. Even if a government effectively facilitates emigrants' return or has built up an active network of diaspora members, it is crucial to monitor programme implementation, measure impact, and use findings to further improve engagement within and outside government. |
| Due to limited monitoring and evaluation, it is difficult to fully assess the effectiveness of diaspora institutions, not to mention their impact on development efforts at home. Nonetheless, their experiences still offer three important lessons, especially for governments in the west, which are contemplating engaging their own diasporas. | Due to limited monitoring and evaluation, it is difficult to fully assess the effectiveness of diaspora institutions, not to mention their impact on development efforts at home. Nonetheless, their experiences still offer three important lessons, especially for governments in the west, which are contemplating engaging their own diasporas. |
| First, successfully creating formal government institutions requires serious preparatory work aimed at understanding diasporas' needs, wants, and potential; appraising the current government approach to diaspora engagement; and learning from the experiences of other countries. The Indian government, for instance, tasked a high-level committee with recommending a broad but flexible policy framework and country-specific plans to engage the estimated 20 million Indians abroad. For two years, a five-person committee undertook a mapping exercise focused not only on identifying the size and locations of the diaspora but also its members' skills, capacity, and willingness to engage. | First, successfully creating formal government institutions requires serious preparatory work aimed at understanding diasporas' needs, wants, and potential; appraising the current government approach to diaspora engagement; and learning from the experiences of other countries. The Indian government, for instance, tasked a high-level committee with recommending a broad but flexible policy framework and country-specific plans to engage the estimated 20 million Indians abroad. For two years, a five-person committee undertook a mapping exercise focused not only on identifying the size and locations of the diaspora but also its members' skills, capacity, and willingness to engage. |
| Second, how institutions are created and how their activities are chosen are also critical indicators of success. During the planning phase it is important to delineate clearly the division of responsibilities inside and across government agencies and to establish sufficient buy-in from key actors. If an institution does not have legitimacy, it will become susceptible to political manipulation. Careful planning and communication are particularly important because some diasporas have little trust in their origin-country governments. Among diasporas that emigrated for mainly economic reasons, a perception of pervasive corruption and ineffective governance at home can also impede a government's ability to build trust. The Indian and Filipino diaspora are examples of a long-standing and economically driven diaspora whose trust had to be regained before the institutionalisation process could succeed. | Second, how institutions are created and how their activities are chosen are also critical indicators of success. During the planning phase it is important to delineate clearly the division of responsibilities inside and across government agencies and to establish sufficient buy-in from key actors. If an institution does not have legitimacy, it will become susceptible to political manipulation. Careful planning and communication are particularly important because some diasporas have little trust in their origin-country governments. Among diasporas that emigrated for mainly economic reasons, a perception of pervasive corruption and ineffective governance at home can also impede a government's ability to build trust. The Indian and Filipino diaspora are examples of a long-standing and economically driven diaspora whose trust had to be regained before the institutionalisation process could succeed. |
| Diaspora-engaging institutions should also invite diaspora involvement in setting their agendas to generate trust and ownership. Governments should take care, however, to avoid creating a privileged "insider" group of diaspora partners. | Diaspora-engaging institutions should also invite diaspora involvement in setting their agendas to generate trust and ownership. Governments should take care, however, to avoid creating a privileged "insider" group of diaspora partners. |
| Based in Manila, Dovelyn Rannveig Agunias is a senior policy analyst with the Migration Policy Institute, an independent think tank that analyses international migration policy | Based in Manila, Dovelyn Rannveig Agunias is a senior policy analyst with the Migration Policy Institute, an independent think tank that analyses international migration policy |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |
Previous version
1
Next version