"How do you make it work in practice?"
"How do you make it work in practice?"
We’re going to hear more and more of it in the days ahead, especially from government functionaries, who seem all too eager to mention it at every opportunity.
We’re referring to the buzzword these days, which is the “whole-of-nation approach” to solving the country’s main problems, whether it’s poverty, corruption, armed rebellion or terrorism.
The basic rationale for the whole-of-nation approach is that government cannot go it alone, even if it can muster enough economic resources through taxation, and has extensive presence from the national down to the grassroots levels.
The private sector has the capital to generate jobs and make the economy grow. But business has to operate within parameters set by law—and the government. Of course, business is now well aware of the social dimension of its work. Thus, we have corporate social responsibility projects that seek to convey the message that it’s not only after profit but also wants to help in alleviating poverty or protecting the environment.
Civil society refers to the organized citizenry composed of people’s organizations—farmers, workers, fisherfolk, youth, women, small entrepreneurs, and indigenous peoples, among others—and non-government organizations or nonprofit groups and institutions engaged in development work or espousing various causes. They, too, must operate within the constitutional or legal framework, and conform to social norms.
Hence, the government should be the main catalyst of change, with the private sector and civil society providing support to its development initiatives.
Before this new approach became fashionable, we had “comprehensive,” “holistic,” “integrated,” and “total” approaches to national problems. Those buzzwords became trendy in the 1970s onwards.
The whole-of-nation approach was actually preceded by the “whole-of-government approach” or WGA. This refers to the joint activities performed by different government departments and agencies in order to provide a common solution to a particular problem or issue.
The whole-of-nation approach basically entails a more participatory process. While the WGA was state-driven, the whole-of-nation approach is more of a partnership between the government and different segments of society.
The whole-of-nation approach can apply to the campaign against illegal drugs by addressing both supply and demand. The government can deal with the supply through police operations and draconian measures, but the rest of society must do its part especially in reducing the demand, through treatment and rehabilitation of drug dependents, education of the youth on the dangers of drug addiction, and similar measures.
The whole-of-nation approach can also apply to fighting terrorism.
Foreign Affairs Secretary Teddyboy Locsin, while still our Permanent Representative to the United Nations, underscored during last year’s UN General Assembly annual debate on measures to eliminate international terrorism, that the Philippine government has adopted the whole-of-nation approach, and affirms its rejection of “terrorism in all its manifestations wherever, by whomever, and against whomsoever committed—and whatever the excuse.” Terrorism, he emphasized, “is a global problem no country can tackle alone. The fight against terrorism should unite us all. Foreign terrorist operations do not recognize borders.”
It’s not just in the Philippines where the whole-of-nation approach has gained credence.
In Singapore, public service agencies have been urged to adopt a whole-of-nation effort through partnership by government with business, citizens and other stakeholders to develop better solutions together.
A statement of a recent meeting of foreign ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations also reaffirmed the importance and effectiveness of the whole-of-nation approach over a purely military option in combating terrorism and violent extremism and mentioned ways of fighting terrorism, including “preventive education, involvement of women and youth and civil society, promotion of peace and moderation as a counter-narrative, and more effective use of social media in countering terrorist messages online.”
While the whole-of-nation approach represents an improvement over WGA, it requires diligent efforts on the part of government to attract not just the private sector and civil society behind development initiatives. It also requires close coordination among government agencies at various levels, which may not be an easy thing to do at all.
The way I look at it, the whole-of-nation approach sounds good in theory, but how do you make it work in practice? The government can only ask the private sector or civil society to extend their cooperation or assistance in certain projects, but not compel them. If there are no diligent efforts to convince the private sector and civil society to support government initiatives, then this approach becomes just a slogan uttered in an echo chamber, calculated to look good before the people but in essence pure and simple lip service with little commitment to make it really work.
We hope not.
ernhil@yahoo.com