When it comes to providing basic services like education, healthcare, and finance, who is responsible? Unarguably, most would say government. But, when the government can’t do it, should we let someone else step in? By letting another group—the private sector, NGOs, social enterprise—provide these services, do we do a disservice to the poor? Worse, do we send the message that it’s okay for government to fail?
These topics came up during a recent workshop hosted by the Rockefeller Foundation in Bangkok. Dr. Timothy G. Evans, dean of the James P Grant School of Public Health at BRAC University in Dhaka, eloquently argued that by letting private healthcare and education mushroom, we do a disservice to the poor. We cut the poor out of the equation by only providing for the wealthy.
Indeed, we have seen this happen in India, with the proliferation of top-end hospitals and healthcare providers that provide world-class care (good enough for people to travel to India from other countries) that the poor would never be able to afford. Meanwhile, government hospitals languish.
If we let private-sector solutions flourish, do we give government permission to neglect its duties?
While the private sector may not worry about whether the government does its job, NGOs often do. A small nonprofit organization in Mumbai has considered this question for 30 years. Apnalaya works with a base of the pyramid group that lives on a landfill. The organization is unique in that it does not focus on providing services that it believes to be the government’s domain. Through their work, they empower the community to lobby the government to provide these services, but they don’t actually offer to meet these needs.
Their approach is hard-headed, but is based on the belief that if you do the government’s work, the system will never change. Like many NGOs, this organization works hard to remain sustainable, but even if they tried to fill government’s shoes, they would run the risk of perpetuating unsustainable services and unrealistic expectations.
So, if private sector runs the risk of primarily providing services for the wealthy, and NGOs often provide unsustainable services to the poor, where does social enterprise fit into this equation?
Social enterprise strives to bridge gaps left by government, and often does so in a sustainable way. Unlike purely profit-motivated private-sector business, social enterprises offer services that the poor can afford. And, because the services are often paid for, the approach can be sustainable and independent of grants.
We can look to the affordable private school space for a demonstration of the middle ground between private sector solutions, government, and NGOs. Affordable private schools exist as an alternative to government schools because they provide basic education, but they differentiate themselves from pure private sector solutions because they charge low-fees for their services, and are positioned to be affordable to poor customers.
Affordable private schools are just one example of a way to close the gaps left by government and do so in a sustainable way. But, in providing an alternative to government solutions, does social enterprise deter government from doing its duty to provide basic services? More on this next week in our last post in a series related to affordable private schools.
*This post is part of a series in partnership with Gray Matters Capital.
Image by Christopher Macsurak via FLICKR.
Anoj Said,
January 10, 2011 @ 7:10 pm
While creating a systemic change is indeed required, the question one has to ask is – do I lobby/wait for a grant/subsidy that may/may not come my way, while another generation would have slipped into the grinding cycle of poverty? Or do I embrace a market based approach and accept that as a part of my livelihood existence.
I think the verdict is clear when you see private schools mushrooming in low income communities and people taking loans to get access to water and sanitation facilities.
Rafeeq CE Said,
January 12, 2011 @ 10:33 am
This is a classical problem in India. The Central and State governments always make good plans for the root level development, but most of them hardly reach the poor. The implementation of Panchayat Raj provided enough opportunity to steal money even for a local Muncipal\Village office bearer.
Education for All? Invite Government to the Table Said,
January 15, 2011 @ 1:57 am
[...] This post is the second half of a piece we published last week, Basic Services for All: Whose Responsibility is it Anyway? [...]
sadasivan Said,
January 15, 2011 @ 5:51 pm
First,one should ask,what the Government,especially,the UPA now,at the Centre, wants,with such an enormous POWER,vested in it.UNELECTED,MM Singh,Globalist,member,Club Of Rome,is suspected to have been PLANTED,by the Rothschilds,for making India LOSE her Sovereignty,by bringing, in Oligarchy first,in the Democratic Republic Of India.There are also other Globalists,CIA-,Mossad-,MI6- moles etc.
For changes to occur which favour the poor,or at least do Justice to them,such a Government,led by Globalists have to be removed and the Government should have benevolent Nationalistic Policies.
And,for God’s [or India's poor's] sake,no philanthropic Foundations,please.