Empowerment examined

110 Pages·2004·0.52 MB·English

Development
and
Social Diversity
Introduced by Mary B. Anderson
A Development in Practice Reader
Series Editor: Deborah Eade
Oxfam (UK and Ireland)
Published by Oxfam (UK and Ireland)
First published 1996
© Oxfam (UK and Ireland) 1996
A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library.
ISBN 0 85598 343 4
All rights reserved. Reproduction, copy, transmission, or translation of any part of this
publication may be made only under the following conditions:
• with the prior written permission of the publisher; or
• with a licence from the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd., 90 Tottenham Court Road, London
W1P 9HE, UK; or
• for quotation in a review of the work; or
• under the terms set out below.
This publication is copyright, but may be reproduced by any method without fee for teaching
purposes, but not for resale. Formal permission is required for all such uses, but normally will be
granted immediately. For copying in any other circumstances, or for re-use in other publications,
or for translation or adaptation, prior written permission must be obtained from the publisher, and
a fee may be payable.
Available in Ireland from Oxfam in Ireland, 19 Clanwilliam Terrace, Dublin 2 (tel. [phone])
Published by Oxfam (UK and Ireland), 274 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 7DZ, UK
(registered as a charity, no. 202918)
Designed by Oxfam Design Department
Typeset in Gill and Baskerville
Printed by Oxfam Print Unit
Oxfam (UK and Ireland) is a member of Oxfam International.
Contents
Preface
Deborah Eade 5
Understanding difference and building solidarity: a challenge to development
initiatives
Mary B. Anderson 7
Gender, development, and training: raising awareness in the planning process
Naila Kabeer 16
Working with street children
Tom Scanlon, Francesca Scanlon, and Maria Luiza Nobre Lamarão 26
Older people and development: the last minority?
Mark Gorman 36
Culture, liberation, and ‘development’
Shubi L. Ishemo 40
The politics of development in longhouse communities in Sarawak, East Malaysia
Dimbab Ngidang 55
What is development?
Hugo Slim63
Research into local culture: implications for participatory development
Odhiambo Anacleti 69
An education programme for peasant women in Honduras
Rocío Tábora 73
Challenging gender stereotypes in training: Mozambican refugees in Malawi
Lewis B. Dzimbiri 78
Defining local needs: a community-based diagnostic survey in Ethiopia
Yezichalem Kassa and Feleke Tadele 82
Empowerment examined
Jo Rowlands 86
4 Development and Social Diversity
Some thoughts on gender and culture
Maitrayee Mukhopadhyay 93
Who is the expert?
Valerie Emblen 95
Annotated bibliography 100
Children of war in the Philippines 5
Preface
Deborah Eade
Social diversity is a relatively new addition to community). In so doing, it holds up a critical
the lexicon of development practitioners and mirror to development processes (and aid
thinkers. Yet it has quickly come to represent programmes), showing how these can actually
both what is most inspiring, and most depress- generate poverty and exclusion. Indeed, the
ing, about human potential. The recognition interventions of official agencies and NGOs
that our needs, our perspectives, and our priori- alike have often exacerbated inequality, and
ties are shaped both by who we are — and by further disempowered the powerless, largely
how we relate to others, and they to us — repre- because they have ignored differences in how
sents an important advance in our under- poverty and oppression are constructed, or the
standing of how societies function. It thus ways in which our identities are mediated by
changes how we perceive our own roles, as power. Diversity does not mean breaking down
individuals and as institutions, in working for society into ever smaller sub-sets, or attaching
social and economic justice. more labels to people; but rather seeing how the
Mary B. Anderson, who introduces this interaction of various aspects of our social and
Development in Practice Reader, has made economic identities comes to shape our life
major contributions to policy and practice in options. A deeper understanding of these
this field. Her work has provided the processes shows how detrimental it can be to
international development community with trust that the situation of one set of people is a
more sensitive tools with which to analyse the barometer against which to measure the well-
contexts within which we act; and more subtle being of society as a whole.
ways in which to listen to those whose thoughts Here, Mary B. Anderson argues that the
remain unspoken, or whose voices we have contemporary expressions of intolerance, com-
been unable (or did not wish) to hear. Her bined with the extreme abuse of power, require
insights into how we can best respond to us urgently to re-examine the implications of
people’s individual and collective capacities diversity in the context of development and
and vulnerabilities, and specifically in terms of emergency relief work. The massacres that
gender analysis, have influenced many official took place in Rwanda in 1994 were an abhorr-
aid agencies and non-governmental organisa- ent example of how assumed differences
tions (NGOs) around the world. between one set of human beings and another
The greater recognition of social diversity can be invoked to inspire acts of unspeakable
(for instance, in terms of gender, or age, or brutality, and how fear can be manipulated for
cultural identity) reveals some of the conflicts political and material gain. The cynical term
within social groupings that were previously ‘ethnic cleansing’ disguises barbarity of a
regarded as homogeneous (such as the house- similar kind, based on the totalitarian view that
hold, the urban neighbourhood, or the refugee difference cannot be accommodated within a
6 Development and Social Diversity
society; and, by extension, that belonging to a are far from understanding how to create devel-
particular culture or social group means that all opment policies, practices, and institutional
individual members must by definition share mechanisms that can represent (and thus are
identical interests. Lethal combinations of fear accountable to) all interests in society, rather
and loathing have, throughout history, allowed than being defined around those of certain
one set of human beings to dehumanise others privileged or more vocal sectors. But in trying
— emphasising (or inventing) difference in to respond to existing forms of diversity, we
order either to deny the right to express that must also recognise the wider context in which
difference, or (as under the Apartheid regime in we are working. For economic globalisation
South Africa) as a pretext for the systematic and rapid advances in information technology
subordination of particular communities. are generating ever-greater homogeneity across
Yet the denialof diversity — and hence of societies and cultures. We listen to the same
the privilege and discrimination that flow from music, depend on the same computer software,
it — can be equally devastating in impairing visit the same hamburger chain — and even
people’s lives. For instance, the ‘quiet communicate through the same language —
violence’1 of the fact that over half of all whether we are in Miami, Manila, or Moscow.
murders of women, whether in Brazil or in The challenge is to form the kinds of alliance
Bangladesh, are committed by their husbands that are needed in order to resist cultural and
or male partners. Or the ‘apartheid of gender’,2 ideological domination, but without falling
which means that fewer than two dozen women into an anachronistic isolationism.
have ever been elected as heads of state or of If we believe in the universality of human
government in the history of the world. It is the rights, an awareness of diversity places upon us
categorisation of people according to a single a moral responsibility to work for the eradi-
characteristic or set of traits — a physical dis- cation of the discrimination and exclusion that
ability or illness, skin colour, sex, age, stem from it. However, such an awareness also
language, political views, sexual orientation, holds the promise of still richer and more
culture or religion — and conceding or denying exciting forms of solidarity in the quest for a
rights and opportunities to them on that basis. world based on equality and social justice for all.
When societies believe in their intrinsic fairness
— ‘in letting the best manwin’ — attemptsto Deborah Eade
redress such systematic bias are often cast as Editor, Development in Practice
improper interference with the ‘natural order’,
a denial of ‘fair play’, or an indulgence in February 1996
‘political correctness’. In addition, certain
disciplines and ‘laws’ are perceived as neutral
and immutable. Indeed, discrimination may Notes
come to seem so natural that we fail to see it.
Yet, after years of research by feminist econ- 1 A phrase coined by Betsy Hartmann and
omists and others, UNDP now estimates that if James K. Boyce in A Quiet Violence: View
women’s unremunerated (invisible) work was from a Bangladesh Village, London: Zed
monetised, not only would it yield some US$11 Books (1993).
trillion each year, it would irrevocably change 2 The ‘apartheid of gender’ was the central
the face of orthodox economic analysis.3 A theme of the 1993 UNICEF annual report,
deeper recognition of the diverse ways in The State of the World’s Children,
which people relate to the market would thus Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
help to shape development policies in a more 3 UNDP: Human Development Report 1995,
equitable way. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Written largely by development practitioners,
the papers in this volume demonstrate that we
7
Understanding difference
and building solidarity:
a challenge to development initiatives
Mary B. Anderson
People — as individuals — differ, and peoples ‘successful’ in meeting their stated objectives.
— as groups and societies — differ. Those of us We have learned that awareness of the intrinsic
who work within the framework of broad social socio-political structures that determine
movements, including the area(s) of inter- economic and social roles in any society is an
national social and economic development, essential ingredient of effective development
must acknowledge that such differences exist, programming.
even as we seek to apply encompassing solu- The papers in this collection deal with a
tions to large and comprehensive problems. variety of categories of people and analyse the
Development theory and practice of the role assignments, both natural and socially-
1950s and 1960s generally assumed that constructed, that make their circumstances of
poverty was more or less homogeneous and special concern for development practitioners.
that effective poverty alleviation efforts would, They raise and examine central issues of
in a reasonable period of time, spread cultural blindness on the part of ‘outsider’ aid
sufficiently to include most people. Experience providers who fail to recognise the realities of
showed these assumptions to be mistaken. ‘insider’ aid recipients.1 And they propose
Increasingly in the last thirty years, therefore, helpful and important shifts in thinking and
development analysts, policy-makers, and programming that are required if development
practitioners (very often responding to assistance is to serve all of the people it is
evidence brought forward by groups who intended to serve. The advantages and funda-
found themselves excluded through develop- mental necessity of recognising differences
ment efforts) have identified categorisations of and diversity are amply demonstrated through
people who are ‘left out’ of generalised devel- these articles.
opment processes and who, therefore, require In this Introduction, however, I shall take a
special programming attention. Specifically, somewhat different approach. I shall argue that
we have learned through practical experience, the current emphases in international develop-
and through analysis of this experience, that ment assistance on recognising differences and
certain groups — for example, women, the appreciating diversity have both positive and
elderly, children, and others who are negative impacts. In the first section, I begin by
marginalised by their societies because of race, examining the gains in development program-
ethnicity, religion, or language — very often do ming that are realised from recognising
not participate in or benefit from development differences. In the second section, I turn to the
programmes that are generally applied, even corresponding examination of disadvantages
when these programmes are recognised as that have arisen both for programming and for
8 Development and Social Diversity
outcomes when development practitioners mothers, wives, daughters, and sisters; when
misapply the methodologies that highlight family resources were scarce, parents chose to
difference. In the third section, I pull the two take sons to the clinic when they were ill, but
together and discuss the importance of waited, sometimes too long, to see if their
programming on the basis of differences — but daughters would get well without medical
of doing so in ways that unite, rather than assistance; men who earned extra cash through
distinguish, people’s interests and that wage labour or the sale of cash crops bought
advocate shared societal progress, rather than ‘luxury’ items such as radios and bicycles,
only special (albeit justified) sub-group while women, whose income sources were
empowerment. I conclude that those of us who shrinking, remained responsible for household
work internationally must find a way to food, health, and education and, as they were
maintain a balance between appreciation of pressured to meet increasing family needs with
difference and affirmation of sameness, fewer resources, favoured sons over daughters,
between programming according to special thereby reinforcing the cycle of advantage and
circumstances and programming for disadvantage.
commonality. The importance of the recognition of these
unintended but systematic consequences of
economic change, often brought on and
The ‘good’ of recognising encouraged by external aid, cannot be
differences and appreciating overemphasised. So long as women, and their
diversity roles as producers and distributors in the
economic sphere, were ‘invisible’ to aid
Recognition of differences planners, the damaging impacts of assistance
on them — and, hence, on their families —
As noted above, early development assistance continued. Many development projects failed
efforts failed to take account of differences because their designers and implementers did
within communities and, thereby, failed both to not recognise the relevance of gender analysis;
integrate and benefit all parts of society. The as a result, scarce development resources have
result of this failure was that some people not produced the broad social and economic
gained from international assistance, while benefits that were intended. Attention to
others were systematically excluded and women and development, and the introduction
disadvantaged. Foremost among groups that of and refinements to Gender Analysis, have
were excluded were women. In country after made a contribution to development theory and
country, through project after project, the practice that should no longer be questioned by
evidence mounted during the 1970s and 1980s anyone with development experience.
that development assistance benefitted male As experience in analysing women’s roles
members of societies at the expense of female and circumstances grew, an appreciation of the
members of societies.2 Men gained access to importance of other differences also emerged.
technologies, while women did not; boys Development analysts and practitioners found
entered and completed schooling at rates that that the assumption of homogeneity in any
far exceeded those of girls; cash crops — beneficiary population was a mistake which led
largely in the domain of male farmers — were to ineffective programming. In addition to
encouraged at the expense of food crops, which acknowledging the differences of women’s
were the responsibility of women. and men’s roles and status, we found it useful to
Furthermore, evidence also emerged that the ‘disaggregate’ populations according to urban
distribution of the gains realised through and rural contexts, by age groupings, and,
development assistance were not shared often, according to sub-population groups
equally withinfamilies and households. Male defined by language, ethnicity, clan, religion,
family members were often fed before their or race.
Understanding difference and building solidarity 9
It is important to note that our motivation for practitioners to set priorities among competing
identifying such groups was born, primarily, demands for scarce resources. From observing
from negative experiences. We were alerted to how existing systems lock certain people into
the importance of differences, because we disadvantaged positions, they could set
observed that programmes planned without priorities among various programme options in
attention to them did not reach everyone. The order to focus effort and resources on strategies
categories of people whom we identified were, that would most effectively address these
in general, seen to be ‘marginalised’ or systems and enable people to break out of the
‘vulnerable’. We shall come back to this in the traps of impoverishment.
second section below. These advantages, gained through the
The adoption of disaggregation method- recognition of difference, and its systemic
ologies3resulted in several distinct benefits in creation and re-creation, are great. Develop-
development programming. ment efforts (both international and
First, these methodologies overcame the indigenous) are remarkably improved when
exceedingly important problem of they apply the methodologies for disaggreg-
‘invisibility’. That is, they alerted development ation that have been developed in the past two
practitioners to the fact that difference does decades.
exist, and it led them to analyse both why it
exists and how its existence interacts with the
Appreciation of diversity
implementation of development activities.
Both the recognition of difference and the Even as the development assistance
ensuing understanding of its place and dynamic community was learning to recognise and to
within societies were essential elements of programme in ways that incorporated differ-
understanding the context where any effort was ences, it was also moving towards an overdue
to be initiated. and equally important appreciation of divers-
Second, knowing that some groups were ity. (The articles in this collection attest to both
excluded from automatic inclusion in benefits the importance and momentum of this
allowed development assistance to be directed movement.)
and honed, so that it reached those groups Again, in the 1950s and 1960s, international
whose special needs were identified or who development assistance provided by countries
would, otherwise, have been left out. of the North to countries of the South generally
Third, understanding how exclusion of some assumed a single development model, based on
groups occurs allowed development European and North American experience in
practitioners to develop more intelligent and the Industrial Revolution.4 And, again,
accurate strategies for overcoming disadvan- evidence of failed development efforts in many
tage through development assistance. If places revealed the inappropriateness of this
disadvantage were ‘natural’ — that is, the assumption. Development practitioners came
inevitable result of innate characteristics of a to see and appreciate the fact that cultures differ
certain group — then programmes might and that models of development must take
simply be developed to meet the needs of such account of diversity if they are to succeed.
groups as an act of charity. However, Socio-cultural diversity — the rich variety of
recognition that the systems which marginalise ways in which people and peoples assemble
people according to a ‘natural’ characteristic their systems of belief and values, of working
such as sex, age, or race, are socially and surviving, and of living in relationships
constructed meant that one could devise with others — has thus assumed a central place
strategies for altering and reconstructing in the thinking and planning of development
systems to end marginalisation. workers. The appreciation of diversity forces
Finally, recognition of difference and the abandonment of formulaic development
systems that reinforce it allowed development approaches. Local contextual realities assume
10 Development and Social Diversity
Possible negative consequences of
priority in the planning of development
programming based on differences
strategies and programmes.
and diversity
Distinct advantages are also realised in
development programming when diversity is
Recognition of differences
recognised and appreciated.
The first advantage, again, is awareness. Past As we noted above, attention to differences was
(and present!) failures of development initially motivated by recognition that certain
programming often reflect a misfit between groups were regularly disadvantaged by
expectations and values imported from one mainstream development. Thus, disaggreg-
context and the realities of the context where ation methodologies are directed primarily
they were applied. To see and to appreciate as towards identifying problem areas. That is,
valid the existing realities and capacities of disaggregation is used to identify ‘vulnerable’
people whom development efforts are intended or ‘marginalised’ groups. What often occurs,
to assist is essential for accurate planning and then, is that development initiatives are
programming. undertaken only on the basis of needs and
Second, when providers of development deprivations, and fail either to recognise or to
assistance appreciate local realities and directly build on the capacities of the groups to whom
incorporate these into plans for developmental the aid is offered. The situation of women
change, this ensures that local people, those provides an example. As it has become
actually doing the work of their own commonplace to recognise that women are
development, assume responsibility and marginalised from economic and political
ownership of their developmental directions power and that they are, thus, more vulnerable
and processes. This is essential for what is now to poverty and crises than men, it has also
referred to as ‘sustainability’. become commonplace to assume that
Third, and probably most important, when femaleness automatically equates with
development practitioners (especially those ‘vulnerability’. While women are, indeed,
who act as ‘experts’) truly appreciate socio- more vulnerable to marginalisation and all of
cultural diversity, they undertake their work its attendant disadvantages than men, they also
(whether it is a long-term engagement or a have immense strengths. They produce, they
short-term consultancy) on the basis of genuine manage, they nurture, they maintain
respect for the people with whom they work. households and communities in the midst of
There is strong evidence that such respect on hardship, and so on. While it is neither
the part of the aid provider for the culture and necessary nor inevitable that giving attention to
capacities of the people is a major, if not the differences and vulnerabilities will also result
primary, determinant of whether people are in ignoring capacities, experience shows that,
motivated to engage in the activity of too often, this does occur.
development and, thus, of whether the aid Second, among development agencies that
actually achieves its intended outcomes. recognise the importance of identifying
Clearly, the case is strong indeed that differences as a way of focusing their
effective development programming must be programming there is a tendency to perceive
based on a recognition of differences and an and treat all vulnerable groups in the same way.
appreciation of diversity. Much good comes We find, for example, repeated references to
from both. Unfortunately, experience also ‘women and children’, as if they comprise one
shows that a misapplied emphasis on dis- group and as if their circumstances are the
aggregating population groups and on same. Of course it is true that women’s
appreciating cultural diversity in order to focus concerns include, and hence overlap with,
programming efforts may have negative those of children. However, while children (at
consequences, as well as positive ones. least very young ones) are dependent entirely
on others in order to survive, women are not.