BACKGROUND BRIEFING PAPER ON
POSSIBILITIES FOR UNFOLDING
SELF HELP ACTION ON BOUGAINVILLE
First Posted 10 Oct1997. Last Update April 2014.
This paper is a complimentary briefing paper associated with the Laceweb documents:
It may well be that various parties may be prepared to help fund the restoration of Well-being on Bougainville. Given that the ideas contained in the accompanying documents sit comfortably with the locals, it may well be that these Well-being Action processes may be put forward as the way some things may proceed. The seeds may be there to extend the kinds of funding protocols of funding bodies to embrace local holistic mutual-help and self-help Well-being Action.
Grassroots Well-being Action may form a role in obtaining the views of the people of Bougainville about the processes for normalising their life and Well-being.
While describing a comprehensive process, if locals want it, things may start in a very small way with only a few self-starters involved.
Funding may be found to set the basic enabling process in Action. Perhaps funding for torture and trauma sufferers may be a high priority.
Action supporting trauma and torture sufferers is covered in Self-Help Action Supporting Survivors of Torture and Trauma on Bougainville - Small Generalisable Actions - Long Version.
If this scenario finds support on Bougainville, it may be that funding sources could specify the overall funding pool potentially available in any period. It is possible that the funding protocols may have provision to 'bring forward' funding for projects deemed 'significant special projects'.
Non-income producing 'Well-being initiative' plans needing funding (health, education, housing and the like) may be evolved. The release of funds for specific business projects requiring funding may be conditional upon the preparation and forwarding to funding sources of 'income producing business plans'. 'Funding criteria' for both types of initiatives could be set up by the different funding sources. These criteria may be communicated directly to the villagers, or via the enablers.
Funding criteria for income producing initiatives could follow normal business practice as to viability, and sustainability beyond the end of the funding period. Some 'reasonableness' test could be established for non income generating funded proposals. This test could be negotiated by all of the villagers, and funding sources. It may be important that the criteria have some specificity. This may ensure that the villagers put forward only 'spot on' projects.
Ideally, processing of the evaluating of funding submissions would be prompt and fair. Also, adequate reasons would be given for rejection (or 'resubmit following modification') to ensure that the villagers identify rejection with 'the appropriateness of them modifying or dropping the project' instead of harbouring resentment because of a view that 'obstructive' funding sources are causing unnecessary delay for 'vested interest' reasons and/or seeking to impose an outside agenda.
Protocols may be established as to the potential funds available to each village as well as potentially, the ear-marking of funds for multiple-village or all-village projects. Funding could also allow for integrating with other possible sources of funding, and allow any assistance that may be available.
Importantly in the current Bougainville context, the Well-being focus of the Action could well reduce 'violence' and 'militant' approaches as an option in increasing wellness. All members of the village may gain a voice and may be less easily swayed by a demagogue. It may act as a balance level for any one person or group seeking unfair advantage at the expense of their fellows. As well, Mediation Therapy skills may become widely spread throughout the villages and available to peacefully resolve differences.
It is possible that if this self-help Action process is taken up by local Bougainville people, they could set up a model with global application for Grassroots people.