created: from the bottom up. The greatest failure of international development to this day is the wasting of resources due to a lack of comprehensive knowledge of the realities on the ground. Therefore, the key to adequate source allocation is to getting the right resources to where they are needed most and ensuring those resources are being integrated in a sustainable manner. In this sense, it is by searching for solutions together where we can know what actual situation is, what can or should be done, what can be produced; it is about sitting together and looking for solutions together.
A Bottom Up Approach starts from the base up. It is by engaging into projects with and for the community, trying to filter the community’s core needs by which governments and organizations can actually find the structure to make things change. Many researchers agree that if poverty issues want to be addressed, job opportunities must be brought to the population. What these opportunities bring is value creation for the poorest of the poor, for those who are usually excluded from the formal economy but who can be included if given an opportunity. People are capable of doing great things if they are given the opportunity, but what is even more important is that the community actively and directly engages in the projects and becomes the driving force behind them.
1.1. Bottom Up approach to tackling poverty
Muhammad Yunus was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for developing and promoting microfinance banking to help the poor, the media spotlight will shine on his pioneering model.
His Grameen Bank success in Bangladesh with "bottom-up" aid in the form of small loans deserves lavish praise. Countless disempowered people, primarily women, have been lifted out of poverty through the opportunity to become small entrepreneurs and access financial services for the first time. Equally important is the fact that this model has inspired a generation of idealistic young entrepreneurs in the rich nations to flock to this approach. A recent study by the University of Maryland found that "asset-based" social institutions that
‧
combine lending, financing, and other profitable activities with social aims now represent more than $1.5 trillion in assets in the U.S. alone.
While much debate and most of the writing on this perspective have centered around the bottom-up approach and the impact it can have over poverty, a deep exploration of the poverty alleviation implications has lagged. Nonetheless, it is important to highlight that what has not been fully articulated is how this perspective differs from other market-based poverty alleviation approaches, and thus, how its poverty alleviation outcomes may be different. At its core, this approach relies on a hypothesis of mutual value creation; the greater the value created for those living at the bottom, the greater the value that will be created for the nation as a whole. In fact, social enterprises or agencies that are created under this approach are expected to generate acceptable economic and societal returns to the organization and to the local community in which they operate. Furthermore, the revenues generated for the enterprise is either done by selling goods to, or sourcing products from, those at the base of the pyramid in a way that helps to improve the standards of living of the poor.
As a poverty alleviation approach, the bottom up perspective relies on the view that serving markets at the bottom of the pyramid is an economically viable business strategy. As such, this market-based perspective differs from grant-based poverty alleviation programs, as the goods and services provided by the venture are not free of cost. After all, social ventures must generate sufficient revenues to more than cover its costs.
Still, bottom up approaches to poverty alleviation are not new. Micro-finance initiatives have provided modest-sized loans to small local businesses for several decades. Aid agency programs providing managerial and technical assistance to micro-, small- and medium-scale enterprises have been a hallmark of development assistance for many years. More recently, value chain initiatives have emphasized raising the competitiveness of entire industries, and enabling environment programs have targeted policy reforms to transition informal market activities to a more “Western” legal and regulatory business environment within a specific country.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
4
As in the case of many other economic and social research and theories, many studies and publishing have been done in favor and against the bottom-up approach. However, one thing remains true. Social changes that arise from the population remain true to the needs and wants of the population, thus generally having a greater impact.
‧
financial ties with South Africa. Approximately, 70% of Swaziland’s 1.11 million people live in the rural areas, with their income depending mainly of subsistence agriculture. The country’s economy is mainly driven by its membership of the South African Customs Union (SACU) and the Common Monetary Area (CMA). Despite the efforts being done b the government, the Swazi economy has been stagnated for almost two decades in a low-growth trap, with exogenous shocks reinforcing existing structural constraints to growth. Despite being categorized as a middle-income country, the nation battles with severe social challenges – poverty and inequality are pervasive and this is aggravated by the high levels of HIV/AIDS.Recently a sharp decline in SACU revenues in 2011 only demonstrated Swaziland’s economic vulnerabilities. A determinant factor that can aid in the progress of the country is to lay the foundations for economic competitiveness and diversifying the sources of revenue.
Swaziland’s business environment and competitiveness is small and weak and faces a series of challenges. Originally, the country’s private sector relied heavily on Foreign Direct Investment as the driver of growth and thus neglected almost completed any entrepreneurship efforts. Moreover, a large public sector leaves little space for the domestic private sector, which is poorly organized and is not a priority in Government decision making. In general, the Swaziland’s economy is not productive enough and does not generate enough income sources to alleviate current financial burdens with national and international financial institution. Thus, the resources that can be destined towards AIDS and poverty projects is very limited.
2.2. HIV and AIDS situation in Swaziland
The Southern Africa sub-region, in particular, experiences the most severe HIV epidemics in the world. Swaziland, is among the nine countries in Africa, that have adult HIV prevalence rates over 10%. In fact, Swaziland has the highest HIV prevalence rate in the world at 26%, one in four adults are living with HIV. According to the latest figures, life expectancy is just