Swedish Aid to India And Agenda 21
Aparajita Gogoi

A round table discussion on “Swedish Aid to India and Agenda-21’ was held at New Delhi on 26 and 27 August, 1994.  Development Alternatives had organised this meeting along with International Institute for Environmental and Development (IIED), London.  IIED was appointed by the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs as part of a working group to evaluate Swedish development aid to two recipient countries, India and Zambia, in relation to Agenda 21, in order to provide the working group on Swedish aid after the conclusion of UNCED.

Discussion followed the presentation of a paper by Richard Sandbrook and James Mayers of IIED.  This paper presented an overview of Swedish aid to India in the past; the current priorities in Swedish aid to India; a matrix which attempted a broad assessment of Swedish aid to India in relation to the Agenda 21 criteria and principle, with reference to successes, failures and gaps.  The discussion also covered a wide spectrum of related subjects like the sectors involved, the modalities, etc.  The aim of the IIED representatives was to figure out what are the Swedish priorities in India, whether they are in line with Agenda 21, the problems faced and the changed that can be introduced.

Participants were drawn from NGOs and institutions in touch with Swedish aid programmes, the Swedish Embassy, SIDA, etc. and they provided valuable insights on Swedish Aid to India, problems and prospects and what should be done to make this aid programme more productive.

The conclusions drawn from the discussion will be included in the paper presented by IIED to the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  General trends in the discussion seemed to indicate that Agenda 21 and Rio are being taken seriously in India, but this is mostly limited to the NGO sector.  Swedish aid is considered useful and workable due to its focus on poverty, catalytic approach, environmental sensitivity etc.  It also was apparent that India prefers to be, and is working towards becoming self-reliant.  Many participants stressed that Agenda 21 is yet to penetrate the planning and implementing process and that India needs, at the moment, funds from outside to work according to Agenda 21 guidelines.

To improve the Swedish aid programmes, suggestions were put forward regarding parameters of project cycles, how to spread these programmes, dissemination of the aid received, the need to work on lines of past successful projects and importance of networking.

The outcome of the discussion will finally emerge after IIED files the findings and presents them to the concerned Swedish authorities, who thereby will make the necessary changes in the Swedish Aid programme to India.

Back to Contents