| Abstract: | How do specific aid projects in Tanzania strike a balance between control and mobilization, between efficient implementation of a well defined project and the mobilization of a local learning and competence building process? Can the same project organization do both efficiently, or does the control-mobilization relation represent a dilemma? And how do specific definitions of the balance between control and mobilization within projects affect state building locally? These questions are investigated in the context of the Sao Hill Sawmill (SHS) in Tanzania. The relationship between Tanzanian and Norwegian authorities is looked at (a) in the planning of the Mill, (b) in the early evaluations of it, and (c) in its first three years of operations. An attempt is made to show that decision models are both personally ‘constructed’ and systematically reproduced by institutions and that the distinction between control- and mobilization-focused models is of importance for how projects affect local institution building. Whether persons were recruited to the project from private or public institutions in Norway influenced their understanding of what the project was about. The data suggest that this simple distinction is significant for understanding how projects relate to local institutions and development processes. The material indicates that experts from Norwegian public institutions supported a more mobilization-oriented definition of the project, with the possibility of integrating it unobtrusively into existing local institutions. However, a surprise finding was that top-level administration in Tanzania supported the private participants more control-oriented definition. |
