ABSTRACT
Judith Tendler's work is provocative and timely. Estimates of upcoming social fund projects show that the Bank will have committed almost the same amount of lending to social funds during the next five years as in the entire preceding decade. Tendler questions a number of assumptions about providing service through social funds—for example, that inviting project proposals locally gives beneficiaries more voice in designing them and greater community ownership. Social funds invite beneficiaries to make project proposals does not make them demand driven. Demand is the quantity of goods and services that consumers want at a given price. Eligibility criteria, targeting mechanisms, appraisal criteria, and project menus all constrain free choice. Moreover, government projects may also offer beneficiaries choice and may also require cost sharing. Tendler's paper characterizes social funds as demand driven and traditional government projects as supply driven. The so-called demand-driven programs are not purely demand driven, and it is true on the supply side.
