Three years ago, I was sure I understood development. The more I’ve learned, the more problems I’ve come across. There are an infinite number of cases where the practitioners were well-intentioned but the project failed because there was not an accurate understanding of what sort help was needed.
I find that one of the hardest things in development (besides the temptation of cynicism) is ensuring that the change you’re aiming to achieve is both sought and welcomed by stakeholders. I strongly believe that change must be DESIRED before it is okay for any development practitioners get involved. Stakeholders must be aware of the choices they have in the matter, and they must CHOOSE to acquire external assistance. Anything outside of that is an intervention, and should not be classified in the name of development. That is not to say you can’t present them with options, but that’s just it – they’re options – and the local communities should have every right to refuse them if that’s what they prefer.
What people unfamiliar to the field do not always recognize is the thin line exiting in development moving from empowering, enabling and capacity-building to the imposition of our belief systems. We can’t go into someone else’s country, someone else’s home, and tell them everything they are doing is wrong – who are we to say that? Development is not a linear spectrum and we as Westerners are NOT the end goal. Development can exist in a multitude of different forms and should not be assess with a narrow mindset. Living on less than a dollar a day is not an adequate criterion to individually determine the status of a nation. Economic standing is not an accurate depiction of a country’s development because it ignores important things such as a community’s incredible spiritual and cultural wealth.
This involves a lot of thinking and preparation before arriving in Nepal. I want to go to Nepal, and I want to help, I want to be useful. But I need to be critical of the work I do, always ensuring that there is a demand for the work I’m doing and the change I’m trying to bring about.
You mentioned some great points like how development is not a linear spectrum and we as Westerners are NOT the end goal. Sometimes its best for us to take a step back and simply learn and understand the needs of communities rather than rushing to provide 'solutions' and interventions.
ReplyDeleteEngineers Without Borders made this great website about how we can learn from failure within the development field. You should definitely check it out http://www.admittingfailure.com/
Also Beyond Good Intentions is a good resource to learn how aid workers need to be more critical about the work they do: http://www.beyondgoodintentions.com/about.php
I love the mention of EWB in Adam's comment.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Nafisa, and as an ex project coordinator for EWB I experienced this in every project. Our success was through partnering with existing NGO's that had a connection to a community that was in need of our expertise. That initial connection created relationships that connected us with leaders within the community, that had a knowledge of what people in the area needed, and experience with working with the regional government.
What I have found to be the greatest hurdle in sustainable development is connecting the ideas and needs of the community, with the policies and practices of the regional governments. Any international development effort must have strong knowledge of the regional governance policies; whether it is through partnerships with local groups, or an international policy expert; in order to establish long term success of the project.
Hadn't created my blogger acount yet...
DeleteWe always say in Indev that we don't think we have learned much compared to our friends in other programs, but here you are being so wise and putting in words everything our program stands for. I'd say you are definitely ready for Nepal (well I can only say academically, because Nepal will test you every other way for sure). You're awesome.
ReplyDelete