national development planning of bhutan

NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLANNING OF BHUTAN

Rekha a/p Kanniah (Malaysia)Norasyanti Mohd Nor (Malaysia)Noraini Ismail (Malaysia)Farah Zazreen Zainudin (Malaysia)Halimatun Nazira Haji Hasan (Malaysia)Noradila Awang (Malaysia)

Formal name : Kingdom of Bhutan Citizens : Bhutanese Capital : Thimpu Date of Independence : August 8, 1949 Land lock between China and Tibet. Population is 1.6 million with 97 % in rural area.

Country Profile

Gross National Happiness (GNH)

Establish by His Majesty the Fourth King of Bhutan: JigmeSingye Wangchuck in 1970.

The 4 Pillars concept of GNH:

1. Good Governance2. Socio-economic development3. Cultural preservation4. Environmental conservation

Lately four pillars – classified into nine domains:

i. Psychological wellbeingii. Healthiii. Educationiv. Time usev. Cultural diversity and resiliencevi. Good governancevii. Community vitalityviii. Ecological diversity and resilienceix. Living standard

Highlights about GNH Index in 2010

Men are happier than women on average. In urban areas, 50% of people are happy and in rural areas

it is 37 %. Urban areas do better in health, education and living of

standard.Rural areas do better in community vitality, cultural

resilience and good governance.

Population Economy Poverty

Governance Education Health

To confronting the rapid population growth of 3.1% peryear and its demands, including:

dependency ratio, jobs, school-age population andhealth care services

dealing with continued momentum for growthdespite declining fertility

keeping up with population distribution issues inurban areas

generating disaggregated data in all sectors,toenable better planning and formulating of moreefficient interventions aimed at disparity reduction.

To raise real incomes of rural people and create adomestic market for increased production.

More efficient system of financial intermediation toraise the overall level of economic activity as well asthe ratio of investment and savings to GDP; theimportance of a monetary policy that addressesdevelopment and integration of the capital marketis crucial.

Expanded access to social services/infrastructure, particularly in rural areas and to vulnerable groups.

Increased employment generation to addressthe growing urbanization that has criticalimplications for poverty nationwide.

Extended credit outreach to the poor.

To promote GNH, through efficiency, transparency,accountability, participation and equity, to bringabout socio-economic development, especially forrural areas.

To strike a balance between popular participation indevelopment and the gradual transfer of power tolower echelons of Government for an enablingenvironment of growing development complexitiesand building laws upon Buddhist precepts.

To find ways to finance expansion of thesystem regardless quality.

Quality education for all without gender gap ,including provision of sufficient and adequatehostel facilities for girls.

To provides free medical treatment to allcitizens, and for the Royal Government is tofocusing on quality health care.

Continued to reduction of infant, under 5 andmaternal morbidity and mortality, as well asmalnutrition; cervical cancer, and to reducegrowing number of illegal abortions.

• Bhutan’s Development is guided by the document “Bhutan 2020: A Vision forPeace, Prosperity and Happiness”, that sets out the national goals, broad targetsand overall policy principles for the next two decades.

• This document was the culmination of intensive consultations betweencommunities, Royal Government agencies and private and non-governmentalorganizations. It provides a clear framework for development of the five-yearplans and is operationalized through the annual budgets approved by theNational Assembly.

• The planning process involves decision-making in formulating plans andprograms, the responsibility of which is shared among a number of institutions.The main institutions are the Gewogs, Dzongkhags and the central ministries andagencies.

• The main institutions are the Gewogs, Dzongkhags and the central ministries and agencies.

• Most programs originate from the community level though nation-wide and thematic plans and programs can originate from the agencies at the centre.

• The preparation of the five-year plans begins at least two years ahead of the scheduled launch.

• It normally follows a mid-term review of the on-going plan where the Gewogs, Dzongkhags and sectors are involved.

• Next is the steps taken by Gewogs in preparation for the Five Years Plan.

Agriculture, Marketing and Enterprise Promotion Programme

AMEPP was IFAD’s sixth project in Bhutan.

Effective from 1 July 2006 and was completed on 31 December 2012.

The project’s objective:

“improve livelihoods of the rural poor in the programme area on a sustainable

basis by enhancing productivity, income growth and access to economic and social

services”.

AMEPP covered 6 dzongkhags (districts) in Eastern Bhutan − Samdrup Jongkhar, Pemagatshel, Trashigang, Mongar, TrashiYangtse and Lhuentse (from 2006 to 2012)

One of the poorest and most isolated region in Bhutan.

Most agriculture is carried out by smallholders on less than 5 acres (2 ha) of land per household.

i. Supporting capital formation in crop, livestock and niche-crop production.

ii. Improving the conditions under which enterprises and income–generating activities are started and operated.

iii. Enhancing access to rural financial services (especially credit).

iv. Building the capacities of grass-roots organizations and developing skills through training.

v. Improving the common socio-economic infrastructure, especially the road network and marketing support system.

On-farm production

Marketing & enterprise

development

Rural financial services

Access Infrastructure

Program management

• Rated as satisfactory on the basis of programme alignment with national strategic directions.Relevance

• Rated as satisfactory as the overall combination of project inputs effectiveness in raising production and reducing input and marketing costs was appropriate.

Effectiveness

• Rated moderately satisfactory as the infrastructure activities were not able to complete design specification in relation to recommended best practise.

Efficiency

• Rated as satisfactory as the extent of benefits across the target area was variable with some households achieving high levels of performance and others with little benefit.

Household income and assets

• Rated as satisfactory as few groups are still at a formative stage and there is still considerable need for further development.

Human and social capital

empowerment

• If AMEPP hadn’t supported a shift of farming practice, food quality wouldn’t have improved and the cost of food would have been higher due to the transportation costs of importation. Hence, the rating is satisfactory.

Food security and agricultural productivity

• The result is positive but limited resources for environmental protection. The rating for natural resources and environment is moderately satisfactory.

Natural resources, environment and climate change

• Rated moderately satisfactory impact on institutions and policies related to programme implementation.

Institutions and policies

• Rated moderately satisfactory as there are challenges.Sustainability

• Some initiatives have been scaled up, but this has been in response to ad hoc opportunities rather than a proactive and systematic programme approach. Consequently, the rating is moderately satisfactory.

Innovation and scaling up

• Women do seem to have benefited from the programme and mainstreaming activities. The rating for this criterion is moderately satisfactory.

Gender equality and women’s

empowerment

The project has been successful with the support of IFAD.

( International Fund for Agriculture Development)

The project activities were effectively help in reducing thepoverty level in targeted area.

Involvement of IFAD (International Fund for AgricultureDevelopment) has clearly contributed in the improvement ofconnectivity and access to services, generate more incomeand assets for many household and greater farm andenterprise productivity.

Shift from production-driven to value-adding and market-led capability

The project impact on agriculture production was far-reaching across the project area, although not of a high intensity.

An increase in production

However, the capacity in the east to capitalize on potential market opportunities and add value to agriculture production is still limited.

A key bottleneck in building capacity in enterprise development andvalue chain linkages has been dependence on agriculture staff toalso carry out marketing support activities.

Agriculture officers are not qualified to offer business advice or toassist with financial support.

Thus, there is need for different skills and additional expertiseparticularly through the Department of Marketing and Cooperativeto facilitate and strengthen value chain linkage within the region

and across regional and national borders.

Groups are still dependent on government support ratherthan proactively finding their own business opportunities.

However, there is limited government services and givechallenge for those who are in greater need of service.

There is need to build independence and private sectorservice especially for farmers who are affordable to pay

commercial fees.

Planning is really important

Forecast the future

Achieve target/goal

THE END