SUSTAINABLE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN THE PACIFIC: ISSUES, THREATS, PROGRESS AND OPPORTUNITIES

 

 

  1. OVERVIEW OF KEY SHD ISSUES AND CHALLENGES

 

In the transition from subsistence-based island societies to monetized and growth-oriented economies, Pacific island countries have been investing heavily in social welfare and economic growth to ensure improvements in longevity, living standards, literacy levels and acquisition of new skills and know-how.  These investments, bolstered by external donor assistance, have largely accounted for the remarkable level of human development that most PICs presently enjoy.  They have helped overcome the constraints brought about by the relatively small size and the geographic isolation of settlements within each PIC.  Moreover, the Pacific culture of mutual sharing based on the extended family system has resulted in many households being reached with the benefits derived from participation in both the subsistence and cash economies.

 

Threats to SHD

            In recent years, however, some social and economic problems have emerged which now threaten to negate the region’s human development performance.  These problems include a growing labor force that is unskilled and unable to find jobs, inequalities amongst the people and emerging poverty, increased marginalisation of rural and outer islands populations; and erosion of traditional values and support systems.   In addition, many Pacific countries, the race to produce more food and cash to feed a rapidly expanding population has led to severe depletion of valuable land and marine resources.

As a result, the people’s means of  livelihood and survival are seriously threatened.

 

            Meanwhile, low economic growth and rising populations have strained the efforts of Pacific governments to cope with the increasing demand for cash employment and services.  The provision of available social services, as well as the promotion of income-

generating activities, continues to be hampered not only by geographical factors, but by cultural diversities within many Pacific countries.

As a result, in practically all PICs, there has been an emerging trend of disparities in incomes and in the access to resources and economic opportunities.  Disparities are becoming increasingly apparent between social groups, people in rural and urban areas, central and outer islands, and men and women.  In fact, many PICs now acknowledge the existence of specific groups, i.e. women, youth, people in outer islands, remote rual areas, urban settlements, etc. which have been previously bypassed by development efforts and are particularly disadvantaged by current socio-economic and cultural factors.

 

The threats to Pacific human development have been compounded by the increasing aspirations of the people.  Their perceptions of a better life have been irreversibly altered by exposure to modern development, improved education and the commercial mass media which has intensified in recent years.  The Pacific way of life, which has accounted for social cohesion and provided effective social safety nets in the past, is now under siege from the problems brought about by unemployment, as well as by growing inequalities and emerging poverty apparent in an increasing number of local communities.  Indeed these problems require priority attention from Pacific governments because they undermine the traditional cohesiveness and stability of local communities, factors which have largely accounted for the effective conversion of social welfare and economic growth investments into concrete gains in human well-being for most households in the region.  For the foreseeable future perhaps the two SHD challenges which PICs will have to seriously contend with is how to prevent further inequalities between its population and how to provide gainful employment and sustainable livelihood for its people.

 

Emerging Poverty and Inequalities

The worsening unemployment situation is associated with the problem of rising poverty in the region.  Based on household income as one measure of poverty, there is an increasing number of families in many Pacific communities who cannot afford to pay school fees, seek adequate health care, buy or produce basic food requirements, or fulfill traditional obligations to the community and the church.  Families in this situation are considered poor.  Families struggling to provide for these necessities belong to social groups vulnerable to poverty.

 

            These families and other population groups who face declining standards of living are found in increasing numbers in every PIC.  In Fiji, for instance, those living in poverty, or vulnerable to it, may have doubled between 1989 and 1991.  Providing for school fees, rents and traditional obligations meant less money available for nutritious food.  Household cash incomes did not also increase significantly during the three-year period, and thus the quality of life for many households was affected.

 

            Through its impact on the urbanising  process, unemployment weakens traditional support systems and contributes to the vulnerability of many groups.  In many PICs,  the unemployed set up settlements located in marginal areas, near factories, rubbish dumps and major roads which increase their vulnerability.  Overcrowding, poor water supply and inadequate sanitation place strains on the urban environment which affect not only the poor, but also the wider population.  Urban-based problems also divert resources from areas where majority of the socially and economically disadvantaged live;  hence, unemployment as hastening agent for urbanization also causes the further marginalisation of outer island and remote rural communities.

 

            Inequalities are becoming more pronounced in Pacific societies.  That there are those who are rich and others who are poor is gradually being acknowledge in the region; the gap has so widened considerably between them that is now more visible to policymakers and development planners.  In Fiji, the top 20 per cent of wage earners in 1977 received 53 per cent income.  By 1986, the top 10 per cent received 50 per cent of total income.  In Solomon islands, 70 per cent of the total income of households in Honiara accrues to less than two per cent of the population.

 

            Poverty levels and inequalities in the PICs may also be determined based not only on cash incomes, but also on other indicators, i.e. infant mortality, access to sanitation and safe water, incidence of preventable diseases, population growth, life expectancy, educational attainment.  To create profound impact on these indicators of social deprivation and human development in each PIC, and thus overcome current threats to the well-being of Pacific people, primary attention and resources need to be directed to promoting sustainable livelihood as key strategy for reducing unemployment and addressing the emerging poverty and inequalities in Pacific societies.

 

Employment and Sustainable Livelihood

            Most PICs have not been able in recent years to generate adequate increases in domestic wage employment.  Out of an economically active population of 1.8 million in 1991, the region as a whole was able to create only 370,000 job opportunities.  During the 1980s, formal sector employment in PNG increased by only 0.5 per cent annum equivalent to 1,000 jobs a year while the economically active population totaled 35,000.  In Solomon Islands, while wage employment grew by 3.7 per cent per annum during the period 1978 to 1987, the annual average of 722 wage jobs was well below the 5,500 joining the labor force each year.  Most PICs reflect similar unemployment pattern.  It has been estimated that during the next 20 years, Pacific economies will have to create 3 million wage jobs to match the rise in labor force entrants in each PIC.

 

            With the rapid population growth and phenomenal rural-to-urban migration in most PICs, the size of the labor force will exceed the increases experienced in the past.  Wage employment creation is likely to be slower than in recent years due to economic trends both within and outside the region.  Due to overall financial constraints and the expected decline in external assistance, the public sector, which accounts to around 40 per cent of wage jobs in the region, is not expected to contribute significantly to future job growth.  In addition, the smaller and isolated Pacific island countries are not expected to emerge as dynamic economies in the immediate years to come; hence, their contribution to the improvement of the wage employment profile will remain less significant.

 

            The failure of Pacific economies to create more jobs will further strain the subsistence-based traditional social support networks and thus threatened the cohesiveness of local culture.  Many new entrants into the labor force are young men and women who have had years of schooling under the formal education system; their skills training is mostly in preparation for employment outside the subsistence sector.  In general, they do not share the expectations of their forebears and such dislocation from local culture often lead to social problems, e.g. drunken behavior, anti-social tendencies and defiant attitudes to community values, indifference to communal obligations, etc.  This specific dimension involving youth unemployment is a prominent feature of human development problems and opportunities in the Pacific.  Primarily because it reinforces youth alienation, unemployment in Pacific societies can result in substantial social costs that PICs can ill afford to have at this stage of their development.

 

2.       SEARCH FOR MORE SUSTAINABLE AND EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT PATHS:  THE SUVA DECLARATION ON SHD

The foregoing key human development issues and challenges in the region are articulated in the Pacific Human Development Report (PHDR) published by UNDP in 1994.  The urgent need to address the key issues and challenges for sustainable human development in the region prompted Pacific governments, through their Ministers of Planning, to promulgate in May 1994 the Suva Declaration on Sustainable Human-Development in the Pacific.  The Declaration was subsequently endorsed at the 25th South Pacific Forum in Brisbane in August of the same year.  The document contains possible strategy options that individual PICs may take in formulating policies and programmers relevant to the attainment of sustainable and equitable human development.

 

            A strategy framework for promoting  sustainable livelihood in the context of people-centered development can be formulated based on the options contained in the Suva Declaration.

 

3.       NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION OT THE SUVA DECLARATION

A review of current development policies and plans in PICs reveal that their development aspirations mirror closely the priority policy options and strategies contained in the Suva Declaration on SHD in the Pacific.

The current state of human development in PICs, where analysis has been carried out, indicate that past and current development strategies have not produced the intented results.  In many PICs the unplanned outcomes of poverty, increasing disparities between population groups, erosion of traditional values and support systems, growing social disintegration and open disenchantment with the state is adding to the already formidable array of development challenges facing these small island countries.

 

PICs also agree that their preoccupation with more immediate economic and growth objectives have also resulted in the neglect of the social and human dimensions of development.  It is in this context that the Suva Declaration is serving as a powerful reaffirmation of PICs’ commitment to putting people back at the center stage of national development.

 

While the Suva Declaration contains 15 action areas, PICs are encouraged to prioritise these to meet the situation that exists in each country.  Since the endorsement of the declaration by the South Pacific Forum in August 1994, several countries have initiated their own national actions that have far reaching impact on the state of human well-being.

 

Taking Stock of Human Development

The SD encourages PICs to take stock of their own HD situation and to base policies and strategies on solid analysis of the current and future prospects of human well-being as defined by the people themselves.

 

To date, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands, Western Samoa and Tonga have agreed to produce their own national SHD situation analysis with support from UNDP/ESHDP, UNFPA and UNICEF and working in cooperation with SPC, Forum Secretariat and other Pacific-based UN agencies.  An analysis of Western Samoa’s HD situation was prepared in 1993 and will be updated in 1995.  Vanuatu’s SHDSA is expected to be completed by April 1995.  The mechanisms for doing the same in Fiji, Tuvalu, Kiribati and Palau are presently being developed in cooperation with the respective governments, regional partners and UN agencies.

The SHD Situation Analyses are being prepared with maximum national participation and ownership, and will provide pertinent and hard data to support policy development and reforms that will redress inequalities and to build wide national consensus and political support for SHD by providing a common picture of the problems affecting the country’s people.

 

A series of seminars will be undertaken after the completion of each situation analysis to sensitive policy makers, planners, NGOs and community leaders to build consensus and political support for SHD.  It is expected that each country would have in place policies, strategies and programs with sharper focus on addressing inequalities and poverty.

 

Promoting Environment Regeneration

Almost all PICs have now prepared their National Environmental Management Strategies (NEMS) and have established high level committees  and departments to implement their environmental management programs.  SPREP, through the financial backing of many bilateral donors and UNDP/GEF, has taken a lead role in strengthening national capacities for sustainable development.

 

Despite the primary importance of the region’s natural resources to the future survival of its people, the share of government’s resources going to this area is small and genrally inadequate to do the work that is required.  Flawed policy making processes has also resulted in many conflicts between economic growth and resource management objectives.

 

At the same time, there is now a large number of Pacific islanders who are more aware of the need to manage the region’s natural resources in a sustainable manner.  A number of NGOs and activist groups have sprung up in many PICs and are active in advocacy and public education for sustainable development.  NGOs like Siosiomanga in Western Samoa and SPACHEE in Fiji are active partners with governments and donors in implementing environmental protection projects.  Slowly, governments are also recognizing the importance to work directly with the resource owners and to ensure that they also become equal stake owners in the development process.

These initiatives and developments reflect the priority concerns and actions contained in the SD.  While the efforts taken each country are a good beginning, many of these initiatives and projects are still of a pilot nature, supported largely by external funding and may not, in themselves, be sustainable when donor assistance diminish.  It is, therefore, important that  there be an enabling policy environment and appropriate institutional structures to continue to ensure that local initiatives become national priorities.

 

Addressing Inequality and Poverty

It is increasingly evident, that may PICs are now experiencing growing inequalities and emerging poverty.  Those most vulnerable are people who live in rural and remote villages and outer islands and young people and families displaced from the protection of the traditional sector and who have migrated to the growing urban centers.  Women and children, in particular, are especially disadvantaged and vulnerable.

 

In a region which prides itself with an enviable quality of life, inequality and poverty are sensitive issues.  A large part of the problem is that many governments are reluctant to recognize these emerging disparities and are not fully cognizant of the implications of current government policies and strategies on its people.   Consequently many existing policies and strategies in PICs are further exacerbating this growing inequality.

 

While the poverty situation is still not widespread, timely national action in this area is of a preventive nature and a large part of the solution is for governments to recognize these emerging realities and to work hand-in-hand with the disadvantages to evolve practical strategies and programs for combating rising poverty and disparity.

 

In endorsing the Suva Declaration on SHD, PICs recognized that if the growing inequalities amongs the region’s people were left unchecked, they would rapidly erode the quality of the Pacific way of life and frustrate efforts to promote economic growth.

 

Fiji is one of the few PICs that have an official policy on poverty and this acknowledgement is backed by an appropriation of closeto FID 8.5 million in their 1994/1995 budget for social welfare and poverty alleviation.  In cooperation with the UNDP Pacific Regional Equitable and Sustainable Human Development Programme (ESHDP), Fiji has embarked on a national SHD initiative focused on poverty alleviation.  The initiative will start with a comprehensive situation analysis of the country’s poor, followed by a review of existing policies and strategies against the findings of the study and to strengthen NGO capability to work with government to combat poverty.

 

Many PICs recognize the need to redress the growing disparity between the urban and rural areas.  The rapid monetisation of Pacific societies, coupled with unequal opportunities for education and a narrow resource base is steadily transforming the 70 percent of Pacific islanders living in the rural sector into a cash-dependent group very vulnerable to poverty.  Many of them move to the per-urban and urbancneters where they survive in overcrowded and unsanitary squatter settlements and living on very low incomes and intermittent employment.

 

All PICs recognize the need and importance of distributing development opportunities equitably.  Faced with large central bureaucracies eating up much of domestic budgetary resources and the sheer tyranny of distance, it is not difficult to understand why rural and outer island communities perceive that they are worse off  than those living in the urban centers.  In addressing, this pressing issue, PICs have embarked on numerous rural and outer islands development programs.  Many innovative rural development programs like the ones developed by SPC in Mitiaro and North Tarawa, the UNDP Integrated Atoll Development Project, the village project schemes in PNG, the EU IRD Project in Malaita.

 

What these projects have in common is that they are founded on people’s participation and empowerment so that these communities can begin to shape and influence the future direction of the lives – a central tenet of the Suva Declaration.

 

While many countries have made tremendous progress, the situation remains basically unchanged in much of rural Micronesia and Melanesia for the last decade.  It is hoped that their government’s commitment to the Suva Declaration will enable them to reorder current priorities and to redirect existing resources for the rural disadvantaged.

 

Creating Employment and Sustainable Livelihood

Papua New Guinea perhaps provides the most glaring example of the failure to provide gainful employment for its growing rural and urban populations.  The problem has now touched almost everyone through the alarming law and order situation coupled with the growing polarization of the society.  The Government has made employment creation the top national priority and has made a concerted effort to address this situation through the first ever National Employment Summit which took place in May 1994 through the support of the UNDP/ILO Employment, Manpower and Human Development Project.  The summit, which brought together employer and employee organizations, academics and NGOs discussed the key employment and human development issues and reached consensus on a broad-based employment strategy for the country, covering both formal, informal and rural employment.  A strategy paper with specific recommendations for action has been prepared is presently being reviewed by government for operationalization.

 

The challenge of providing productive employment and sustainable livelihood for the large numbers of young men and women coming out of school each year has also prompted the Western Samoa government to embark on a national SHD initiative centered on its youth.  The initiative is a joint government-NGO undertaking with technical and financial support from SPC and UNDP/ESHDP.  The project will establish a comprehensive baseline on urban youth which will provide, for the first time, empirical data and information on a large number of socio-economic variables which will enable more informed policy, strategy and project formulation.

 

Another SHD initiative aimed at developing opportunities for sustainable livelihood by improving rural and agricultural productivity and the establishment of rural enterprises will be implemented by the Government of  Palau this year.  The lead national agent for the project is an NGO, the Palau Community Action Agency, working with SPC, AIDAB and UNDP/ESHDP.

Effective and Participatory Governance

Recent organized public protests and informed challenges, many quite unprecedented, of government policies in several PICs underlie a growing disenchantment and loss of confidence in the state.  It is also evident that civil society is becoming more aware a critical of actions which impinge on their lives and which affects their future security.  The need for open, effective and accountable governance, coupled with an environment conducive for popular participation, were explicitly recognized when Ministers of Planning met to promulgate the Suva Declaration.

 

In the context of policy making, the Suva Declaration recognizes the need for consultations and open dialogue between government and the people.  The Fiji National Economic Summit to be held in May this year is a good example of a participatory policy development process.  Committees, compromising of representative from the private sector and NGOs, will prepare issue papers and recommend appropriate strategies in five priority areas of national concern-deregulation, private sector development, indigenous and Fijian participation in business, social development and public enterprise reform.  Significantly, the Fiji government has recognized the importance of social policy in meeting its economic growth objectives.  Employment and livelihood creation and law and order are the two priority social issues to assistance to the social policy committee for the preparation of the social issues papers and to help identify practical strategies

 

In a bold and genuine endeavor to realign government structures to support the needs of its people, the Tuvalu Government has, in partnership UNDP/ESHDP, embarked on a program of total local government reform.  The objective of the program is to make Island Councils more autonomous so that they can better respond to the development aspirations of its people and to realign government service delivery mechanism to support the Island Councils.  The program will begin with a People’s Congress where island representatives (including traditional leaders and women groups) will come to Funafuti to express their views and aspirations and to reach broad consensus on the kind of local government structure best suited to their unique situation.  The Congress will be followed by an intensive review of the existing system, followed by island-by-island consultations and the implementation of a capacity building program to train local government leaders, local functionaries and community groups to plan and manage the sustainable development of their people and island.

 

Many PICs are also undergoing public sector reforms and corporatization to make government services more efficient and competitive.  It is important that the reform process do not further widen the disparity between urban and rural populations by curtailing service delivery to rural communities or that user-pay policies do not impose additional burden on the poor and those regular paid employment.

 

Advancement of Women

Pacific women have prepared a Platform for Action which identifies to be taken across 13 areas covering health, education, economic empowerment, agriculture and fishing, legal and human rights, shared decision making, environment, culture and family, violence, poverty, peace and justice indigenous people’s rights.

 

In the countries where the UNIFEM Pacific mainstreaming Project has been active, there has been improved national capacity in mainstreaming the concerns of women in national development as well as recognition for the need to produce disaggregated data for effective gender-sensitive planning and decision-making.  The extension of gender training and advocacy work to other PICs is being carried out by the SPC Women’s Bureau.  The ADB and ESCAP have produced a series of national women reports and profiles which will further aid gender-responsive development.

 

Bilateral donors, notably AIDAB and NZODA, have been major sponsors for PICs’ preparatory work for the Beijing World Conference on Women.  It is noted that sustainable human development concerns dominate the aspirations of Pacific women and their participation at the Global Conference will be to ensure that these concerns are incorporated into the global platform for action.

 

While there is growing awareness on women and gender issues, the plight of the majority women living in slum settlements, remote villages and outer islands are still to be addressed adequately and on a concerted manner.  There have been many donor supported projects on improving women’s well being but their impact have been largely local.  These need to be scaled-up and made a part of national development policy to make any lasting impact on the lives of Pacific women.  The Suva Declaration provides clear directions for recognizing and harnessing the tremendous potential of women for national sustainable human development.

 

While the process leading up to the promulgation and endorsement of the Suva Declaration represents a major political and development milestone in the Pacific, its translation into practical actions which will lead to a secure and fulfilling life and future for the majority of Pacific islanders will largely depend on the political will and stamina to genuinely put people first in national and local development.  Many countries have already taken this step and UNDP is committed to working with PICs to build national and local capacity for implementing the Suva Declaration.

 

4.       INHERENT STRENGTHS OF PACIFIC SOCIETIES AND SHD

In pursuing policies supportive of sustainable livelihood in the context of people centered development, it is worthwhile to take into account several positive elements which have contributed to current progress in human development in the Pacific.  These include the large subsistence sector, which has consistently absorbed external shocks; the stable social and cultural fabric based on the community and extended family system; strong government address common concerns through inter-country approaches and organizations.  Policies promoting sustainable livelihood and human development need to build upon these inherent strengths to ensure that social, economic and structural changes will continue to improve people’s lives and well being.

 

            Guided by such policies, promoting sustainable livelihood in the context of people-based development will contribute to effectively managing the transition from subsistence based to monetary and growth-oriented economies.  Improved economic growth and its equitable distribution remain crucial to the future of human development in the region.  Rapid population increase and low economic growth pose a serious threat to the provision of much-needed services in most PICs.  The emergence of a dynamic cash-based economy and effective management of budgetary and other resources, including those inherent in subsistence-based economies, can correct current imbalance in the pattern of development of most PICs.  They can help build a sound social and economic base for sustainable and equitable human development in the Pacific.  As key to the improvement of living standards in Pacific societies, measures to promote livelihood and human development need to be integrated with a broad range of policies on health, education, equity, environment and gender.

 

5.       PARTNERSHIP FOR SHD ACTIONS

Pacific island governments are aware that due to the magnitude of tasks related to ensuring sustainable human development, there is a need for continued and more purposeful partnerships with their own civil society organizations and the development community.  Geographical constraints and the relatively small size of the formal economy will limit the capacity of governments to provide for the needs of a rapidly expanding population.  Hence, governments and NGOs must assist local communities take an active and leading role towards their own development and, in the process, ensure the sustainability of programs and projects.  Aid coordination and consultation between government and donors need to focus on policy dialogues and mobilization of resources to support strategic areas for economic growth and human development.

 

The promotion of sustainable livelihood in the context of people-centered development will necessarily involve such broad-based alliance of the government and the various development partners:  NGOs and grassroots institutions, central and local governments, private sector and commercial entities, external agencies and donors.  Their complementarities will need to be identified and further strengthened.  A reassessment of their pivotal role in the overall development process is vital for a more systematic approach to forging their closer collaboration.

 

6.       RECOGNIZING SOCIAL CAPITAL AS THE BUILDING BLOCKS FOR SHD

Such reassessment need not be confined to the roles, tasks and functions usually associated with program or project execution.  In carrying out activities required to pursue the key concerns for SHD and the promotion of sustainable livelihood, the Government and its development partners will necessarily commit themselves to the standard program support for people-centered development, i.e. a conducive policy environment, responsive institutional and administrative structures, strengthened coordination, implementation and monitoring mechanism, and appropriate targeting methodologies.  All these are vital ingredients for participatory programs and projects to be planned, implemented and monitored.

 

There is a growing recognition that for sustainability consideration to be more effectively incorporated in human development efforts, the Government and its development partners need to work in concert to create an enabling environment for people and local communities to take stock of and augment their social capital.  The Government, donors and the other development partners themselves cannot create social capital, but they can ensure that programs and projects will become vital tools for people and local communities to forge or further strengthen their social and cultural ties, their collective will and determination to pursue a common vision of a fulfilled life for themselves and the generations to come.

 

Core Values

            Their pivotal role, therefore, can be reassessed on the basis of their accepting core values supportive of social capital formation.  Some of these values or guiding principles are as follows:

-          Social capital is the “glue” that pulls together the other kinds of capital (physical, natural, human capital) mobilized by development efforts.  It is generated by collective decision- making, community action, political participation, sound governance and well-functioning institutions.  An operational plan for SHD should focus more on the “glue”, rather than on the other kinds of capital.  A new approach is required, focusing on advocacy, coordination, learning, and partnership, rather than direct implementation.  The existing approach in which each agency pursues its agenda independently of all other is incompatible with this core value.

 

-          SHD requires changes in the way we do things, particularly in these key areas: strengthening civil society, governmental reform and changes in donor  approaches.

 

Civil society can be revitalized by mobilizing existing institutions or agencies.  There is also the need to support NGO-government-business sector partnership.  This can be done by establishing associations or organizations where possible, and informal arrangements elsewhere.

 

Ultimately, the purpose of government reforms must be to restore confidence.  More attention must be given to incentives for tapping existing technical and professional expertise within the country.

 

Donors need to be more patient at adopt a long-term perspective on their own involvement in development activities.

 

-          At national level, the main objective is to enhance capacity to pursue SHD.  The basic building block is the establishment of participatory institutions at local level.

 

-          The emergence of new habits and outlines is a critical indicator of success.  These may be formal and explicit but are often informal and implicit like every day customs and moral at social norms.  They are all evidence of valuable social capital.

 

Some organizations routinely include reference to indicators of social capital, such as meetings held, number of participants at meeting and number of decisions taken.  These indicators provide a framework for incorporating non-tangible dimensions of social change in monitoring work.

 

Due to limited financial resources most donors hold the view that emphasis must be placed on supporting existing institutions instead of creating new ones.  This could lead to the entrenchment of institutions whose behavior is inimical to SHD.

 

-          Social learning can only be effectively promoted if local organizations and communities are allowed to take direct responsibility for design and implementation, and to have the right to call in experts to help them, not merely be the recipients of technical advice.  Outsiders must accept their role is only secondary and learning must be an opportunity foremost for the insiders.

 

 

 

-