Part Three :
Report on the Participatory Process Used for the
Evaluation
and Future of the Alliance
EIFE and delibera.info-alliance
e-forums, and Porto Alegre Meeting
March 2002 - April 2003
5. ON FINANCING
Interpretation of the 22 appraisals and 9 comments.
Almost unanimously (with a few that “half agree”), there
was agreement that the Alliance should continue with the
support as much of the FPH as of other financing sources.
Moving in this direction, the projects
of each group or class of groups should find diversified sources
of financing. One comment stressed the urgent need to give
the necessary means to a workgroup whose exclusive responsibility
would be to raise funds in direct collaboration with the facilitators
of the groups.
The majority also agreed (with some opposition)
that the FPH’s “Call for Initiatives”
for the democratization of the budget is an example of
bravery, challenge, and collective construction. However, there
were also some who think that this Call should be oriented according
to the activities and objectives of the Alliance. There was also
mention of the need that the selection of projects should also be
done democratically by a jury of Allies.
On the other hand, the great majority also argued
that the FPH should contribute specifically to the development
of the Alliance as a collective project to help it begin to achieve
its autonomy, and for which it is more difficult to find
other financial sources, and in particular: for reflection on our
common future, for a cross-cutting reading of the Proposal Papers,
for training in using the Internet, training of facilitators, and
experiments in forms of collective governance. Moving in this direction,
one comment underscored that what should be financed above all are
innovations in terms of collective organization (more than methods
or meetings) and the question was raised as to who, today, would
finance an international network such as the Alliance, which, at
the present moment, also has to reinvent its future?
|
