by Yehudah Paz

The author, former Director of the Afro-Asian Institute and the newly-appointed Director of the International Institute, looks at the past, present and future aspirations of the Institute.

1. Who is this newcomer?

   A new constellation has recently appeared on the horizon of Israel's development cooperation activity. This new body, which began its life (officially) on February 1, 1994, is called the International Institute, Histadrut - Israel. It is of significant proportions: For example, in 1994, it will conduct some 25% of all the courses and seminars listed in the current catalogue of MASHAV, the Centre for International Cooperation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In addition to these 17 programs, it will also offer a further 11 training programs some of which are conducted with a variety of international agencies such as the UN's International Labour Organization (both its workers' education and its cooperative branches), the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) including its Asian and Pacific, its African and its Latin-American sections, the International Cooperative Alliance (ICA) and others. All of these 28 programs will be held at the institute's new training facility located in Bet Berl, near Kfar Saba, some 25 kms north of Tel Aviv. In addition, the Institute plans to conduct, in 1994, on-the-spot courses in 29 countries on five continents. The total number of participants in all of these 1994 programs will be over 1,000. A healthy beginning indeed particularly for a newcomer!

   However, when one looks a bit more closely at this newly-established Institute, one soon recognizes an old friend or rather a group of old friends. The new international Institute was born of the amalgamation of three veteran components, all of which were established by the Histadrut: the Afro-Asian Institute (ILDEC), founded in 1958 as Israel's pioneer in the field of development cooperation; the Abraham Alon Centre for Labour and Cooperative Studies for Latin America (CECLAL), established in 1962, and the Institute for Central and Eastern Europe, set up in 1990. While each of the three frameworks had its own institutional structure and educational framework, all cooperated closely with and enjoyed the support of MASHAV. All three have always seen themselves as part of the overall Israeli endeavour in the field of development cooperation. These are, of course, salient characteristics of the new structure as well.

   The new Institute has five regional, geo-political divisions: Africa; Asian and the Pacific; Central and Eastern Europe and the CIS (former USSR); Latin America and the Caribbean; the Middle East and North Africa (in formation). The participants in the new Institute's training programs are drawn from 130 countries: 41 in Africa (18 English-speaking, 19 French-speaking, 4 Portuguese-speaking); 34 in Asia and the Pacific (19 Asia, 15 Pacific); 14 in Central and Eastern Europe and the CIS; 39 in Latin America and the Caribbean (8 Central America; 12 South America; 19 Caribbean) and 2 Mediterranean.

   The languages of instruction at the Institute are English, Spanish, French and Russian with occasional courses in Bulgarian, Polish and Hungarian. When the newest division the Middle East and North Africa begins to work, it will do so in Arabic.

   It was Isaac Newton, the great physicist, who, in evaluating his colleagues and predecessors, once said: "If I have seen far, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants."

   So too the new Institute, with its more than 39,000 graduates, looks to the future from the vantage point of the achievements of its component parts. It is an expression of both continuity and change, whose present-day strengths derive from the extensive experience of the institutes which gave it birth and particularly from the abilities, skills and knowledge of their staff, most of whom have had years (in many cases decades) of committed service. Yet the new Institute does not see itself merely as a continuation of the past, but rather as a synergetic, enhanced framework which, through active dialogue and exchange with its participants past and present seeks to forge an evolving, relevant program of activity in which past experience, present insight and future outlook are all effectively combined.

   
   

2. What are its areas of interest and concern?

   Looking again at the broad horizon of development cooperation, one might ask: What is the place of the new Institute within it? What are its special interests? To whom and to what does it direct its attention and concern? Fundamentally, these are three.

   The Institute sees itself as a leadership training institute whose primary partner is that broad group of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and movements now generally grouped under the heading of "the civil society." These are people-centred groups, whose scope and significance are both rapidly growing. Note, for example, their role in the UN Ecological Summit held in Rio de Janeiro, their importance in the field of human rights, in the women's movements, etc.

   Today there is general recognition of the need to involve people in the development process and in the promotion of social and economic change. This involvement can take place through mass- based, participatory people's organizations working parallel to and in cooperation with governmental and international agencies whose areas of responsibility in regard to development need no explication here. The components of this "civil society" include trade unions and cooperatives, community groups and women's movements, "grass roots" frameworks and youth organizations and more. The Institute, while not overlooking the need to include a significant number of participants drawn from the staff of government and international agencies in its courses, nonetheless focuses directly and primarily on leadership training for the "civil society." Secondly, the Institute trains leadership concerned with the social and economic aspects of development.

   The transfer of technology is frequently regarded as the essence of development cooperation. While not overlooking the significance of technology, the Institute would maintain that neglect of the socio-economic aspects cannot but weaken, or even negate, the contribution of technology to development. For example, if rural, agricultural development is approached solely from an agro-technical perspective concerned with yields, soil and water usage, etc. (however vital these indeed are) to the neglect of such matters as marketing, supply of inputs, provision of credit, then the chances of success in agricultural development are limited. The Institute seeks to train those who can and must be the agents of social and economic change (in rural and urban settings, of course) and who will thus complement and supplement the enhancement brought about by technical expertise. Today there is a growing recognition of the significance, indeed the centrality to development of human resource and community development and of concern with social and institutional advance. The Institute seeks to respond to this identification of new points of departure.

   The third area of specific concern to the Institute is that of leadership within democratic frameworks be these of the nation, of the community, of the organization or of the movement. Clearly what is required is not merely an expanded set of techniques, but a whole range of new attitudes and approaches. As the process of democratization spreads and deepens, the tasks and nature of leadership within these bodies change in content, context and focus. The institute sees itself as a centre for the training of leadership for these democratic frameworks.

   Beyond this lies the readiness of the Institute to develop programs which respond to the changing needs and concerns of its global constituency as far as possible.

3. For whom and how?

   The new Institute, like its predecessors, defines itself as a leadership training facility. It seeks to use its necessarily limited resources to work with those who, within their own frameworks, can most effectively promote socioeconomic change and further human resource development, which lie at the heart of any successful development process. In the Institute's view, the point of departure for development is the emergence and strengthening of the human, social and institutional infrastructure which is the basis for development. Thus leadership enhancement, training the trainers, building personal and institutional capability are all major objectives of the Institute.

   Leadership training is not to be seen merely as a process of upgrading the skills and talents of individuals who are clearly today's and even more, tomorrow's leaders in their countries, although these elements do have an important place in the curriculum. Indeed, if we look for a moment at the modular structure which characterizes all the varied courses within the Institute's annual program of studies, one can identify three thematic circles of subject matter.

   The first may be termed "the broadening of horizons and the expansion of perspective" i.e. the general overview of the process and problems of development, including its sociology, its economics and its human and cultural aspects. The second thematic area relates to the specific content of the program: be it, for example, agricultural marketing or supply of inputs, financial management, cooperatives in community development, community medicine, the curriculum of workers' educational institutions, or any other of the many specific areas of concern of the dozens of courses of study at the Institute. Thus the first thematic circle is that of the broad conceptual setting, and the second, that of the specific area of concern. The third is, as indicated above, the enhancement of individual capabilities, skills and approaches of the participants.

   These three "circles of study and concern" are the embodiment of the Institute's approach to leadership training. It views this as the three- fold process: the expansion of the horizons of a broad, conceptual approach; the acquisition of specific insights and knowledge directly relevant to the participants' concrete area of responsibility; the promotion of leadership skills and techniques. The programs of study are shaped through an ongoing dialogue with participants past and present.

   Each year's catalogue contains "veteran" courses which have earned their place in the program over many years (yet these too undergo frequent revision and "modernization"); courses which appear for the second, third, fourth, etc., time in response to growing interest; and between 10-1 5% of the courses which are new i.e. making their first appearance in response to new challenges, to changed situations, to direct requests to the Institute.

   The pedagogical approach of the Institute utilizes the lecture, but places great emphasis on work in small groups and study circles, working under a tutor's guidance. These are supplemented by field visit, excursions, individual work, etc. Each participant is required to prepare an individual project, designed for his country and falling within his or her personal frame of competence and responsibility which reflects something new learned in the training program. These projects, which are prepared under a tutor's guidance and presented, verbally and in writing, to staff and to fellow students, constitute an effective link between the theoretical and the conceptual on one hand and practical reality and pragmatic practice on the other. To the Institute's great satisfaction, a very significant proportion of these are actually translated into reality.

In Conclusion

Here then is the new International Institute, Histadrut - Israel. It is new, but its roots go back to the very beginnings of Israel's development cooperation activity. It is an independent body, with its own board of directors and administrative structure, affiliated to the Histadrut, but it is linked with and constitutes an integral part of the work of MASHAV. It has a growing, truly global constituency of over 1 30 countries and has developed working partnerships with a wide range of international bodies. Its outlook is international and its concerns are the evolving needs of this constituency. Yet its roots are clearly and strongly Israeli. The Institute focuses on leadership training for the "civil society," for those concerned with social and economic change, for democratic societies and institutions.

It begins its life facing, as inevitable, a host of difficulties major and minor which must be overcome. But the staff of the Institute are deeply committed to its work and its objectives. They look to the future with hope and with confidence. They believe that they can play a significant role in Israel's development cooperation endeavor and, in so doing, contribute meaningfully to the cause of progress, social justice and human freedom, peace and international friendship throughout the world. With this hope and this commitment they begin the new life of the Institute.