Another long-standing topic that I am finally getting around to putting on my blog... and a good follow-up for the previous blog. It struck me one day in Delwara as I found myself trying to stop two 'community leaders' from neighbouring communities - one a tribal (Gameti) the other a scheduled caste (Meghwal - traditionally tanners/leather-workers).
The fight was over some misunderstanding/miscommunication rather than any real transgression though there were some territorial undertones. I was standing on top of a pile of sand on top of the hill upon which the tribal community has built their basti. It's a beautiful location and the houses there have the best view of the whole village - including the Devigarh fort. Of course, it's cramped up there, there's no water supply (a real problem for the women and young girls who fetch it), and the community is one of the poorest in the village so - relative freedom aside - life is pretty tough for the inhabitants.
I once watched an 80 year-old man on top of that hill crushing rocks next to a 4x6 foot stone cubicle with no roof (which, I discovered later was his home). This involve hammering a 6" iron nail into the rocky ground by banging it with a big stone. In the corner of the cubicle was a little hand-made earthern stove with some ashes at the bottom of it. The old man was too old to really earn any money through labour work. He got most of his meals from the neighbours - which they gave up with what seemed like a mix of reluctance and obligation. After the community sent an application to the citizen's forum, roofing was arranged - just in time to keep his home dry as the monsoon rains started a few days later. By the time we went to put the roof up, he had expanded his house to around 7x6 feet using the stones he had been crushing right there on the spot. Amazing.
In any case, back to the fight. So, there had been some miscommunication. The meghwal chap was working as a mason on the construction work of a water tank. Some mistrust had emerged over the issue of whether work was properly being distributed between therespective labourers of the tribal and the Meghwal community. By the time I was at the site, the situation was pretty bad. There was shouting, throwing of insults, angry faces, high BP, and people throwing their hands up in the air. It reached the point where the parties were shouting that no water tank would be built in that location. Well, there goes the reliable, convenient water source for about 50 families.
As I stood on top of that hill and calmed the people down, shifted the blame onto myself and my team (we did have an unfortunate hand in propagating the miscommunication - it happens sometimes that false information circulates unintentionally in the messy, complex chaos that gets called 'the community') , calmed the two people down, and re-established the fact that the water tank really was a good idea and that everything was going to be ok I found myself thinking about social capital... and my thoughts went something like this...
Social capital is a form of 'the commons'. It is, perhaps, the most fundamental form of 'the commons'. Traditionally 'the commons' has referred to natural resources - initially pasture lands on which shepherds could graze their cattle and later it has expanded to include things like the climate or biodiversity. But my sense is that we really need to start talking about what it is that holds all these things together - what it is that we need to restore if we want to address the tragedy of these commons. And that thing is social capital: our relationships and the potential they represent for enriching lives.
Social capital is the common resource that has been most ignored and most overlooked in the general discourse on the commons. It is like a vast, untapped - almost infinite - sea - like the internet - source of potential for creating the world in new and wonderful ways. If we have high levels of social capital - deep, meaningful relationships with each other that are bursting with opportunities for collaboration - jointly making things happen in ways that are mutually beneficial - then what can't we achieve?
Unlike the traditional and modern commons - our grazing lands and the ecosphere for example - social capital (can we venture calling it community?) has a direct link with our assumptions, biases and prejudices: the way we perceive ourselves, others and the relationship in-between. For example, do we distinguish people - either consciously or unconsciously - according to religion, caste, gender, age, class, education status, appearance, position within an organisation? Do we assign different levels of trust/mistrust based on this? Do we open or close opportunities for working together or, for that matter, even talking to each other based on this?
Every time I make a judgement based on identity and foreclose an interaction, an opportunity to understand, listen, engage and build a relationship, I am simultaneously denying myself and the other person an opportunity to acquire social capital. And this appears to be the most defining feature of what still seems to get called 'community' in this communally dilapidated age. Walls exist everywhere, between everyone, and the result is a bunch of isolated people who can't even have the conversations that they need to have to begin thinking about what it would take to change the world for the better.
I'm not entirely sure what I'm trying to get at here but I think the main point is that if we want to ever start the process of addressing the world's biggest problems we need to engage in a very real way with some of the very smallest. Why do I call it the smallest? Well, given my (perhaps naieve) sense of how the world works - one's own behaviour is the only thing that one really has any control over. I'm not trying to say that it's easy and I don't mean to sound corny but it really does make sense. So it seems that part of saving the world is helping people to realise that they can have control over themselves, and that collectively, if a group of individuals can wake up to this call for taking responsibility for their own behaviour, they can access a vast sea of social capital just waiting to be unleashed as a force for creating a better world together
Create the opportunities - the spaces and the call to get inside them and tap into the source of community. Let them do it!
seva mandir
(25);
learning
(23);
organisational change
(19);
facilitating
(14);
conversations
(12);
community development
(10);
questioning development
(9);
social change
(9);
studying
(9);
action research
(8);
random perspectives
(8);
consulting
(7);
the source
(7);
Udaipur
(6);
appreciative inquiry
(6);
complexity
(5);
personal ramblings
(5);
wisdom
(5);
co-creation
(4);
delwara
(4);
philosophy
(4);
spirituality
(4);
education
(3);
facilitation
(3);
healing
(3);
reconciliation
(3);
social capital
(3);
social objects
(3);
story-work
(3);
tribals
(3);
anthropology
(2);
collaboration
(2);
complexity based methods
(2);
forgiving
(2);
harvesting
(2);
life-work balance
(2);
living systems
(2);
patterns
(2);
reflection
(2);
rights-responsibilities
(2);
self-organisation
(2);
anarchy
(1);
democracy
(1);
dreams
(1);
narrative
(1);
the future
(1);
Showing posts with label collaboration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label collaboration. Show all posts
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Friday, June 27, 2008
Digging the Narrative Approach to Civic Driven Change
I couldn't help myself, to be honest. The opportunity to participate in the dialogue on civic driven change in Jaipur organised jointly by Context, International Cooperation (a Netherlands based social enterprise/consultancy) and CECOEDECON (a 25-year young Jaipur-based NGO), especially getting to spend some time bantering with Fons and his friends/fellow-travellers was just too good to miss... Especially as the subject seemed to be a wedding of two subjects that I am passionate about: social change (of the civic driven variety) and complexity theory.
Admittedly, I was a little confused about the purpose of the gathering (as in what we hoped to get out of our discussion on these two subjects), and I also felt that I would have appreciated more time and space for genuine dialogue on the subjects raised rather than what turned out to be a rather linear (admittedly it was a circle) exchange of views (funny, considering all the concern with social change itself being a non-linear process!)... But there were great time constraints and I had the good fortune of sitting in the debriefing group at the end, where there was more space for this kind of an interaction.
Overall, what was most meaningful for me? I think, it is the insights I got into the following questions (which is also, I realise now, a reflection of my what questions I was carrying with me):
An interesting opportunity has also emerged for Seva Mandir to work with Fons and Co on the narrative based collaborative action research on civic driven change, including - but not limited to - child-centred change. It also seems to reverberate with conversations we have been having within Seva Mandir on the topic of distilling our own understanding of the change process (including the one we had during the annual camp) and our oft repeated pride in being an organisation that learns from and builds its knowledge based on experience!
Some questions, however, that I'm still not totally comfortable with are the following:
To what extent and what kind of NGO intervention can still permit us to call what happens as Civic Driven? For example, if Seva Mandir initiates a dialogue, makes available certain resources and provides facilitation inputs as a result of which citizens begin to organise themselves around certain resources, issues, commons and values - does this count as civic driven change? Where is that fine line between civic driven and not civic driven change (or perhaps we'd be better off talking about a gradient from totally self-organised civic driven on the one side to coordinated with some civic participation on the other)? It seems to me that the nature of the change that we talk about has some pretty serious implications and this need to be unpacked.
In any case, the wonderful company and conversations at dinner provided a great end to a very interesting day! So thanks to all for making it possible!
Admittedly, I was a little confused about the purpose of the gathering (as in what we hoped to get out of our discussion on these two subjects), and I also felt that I would have appreciated more time and space for genuine dialogue on the subjects raised rather than what turned out to be a rather linear (admittedly it was a circle) exchange of views (funny, considering all the concern with social change itself being a non-linear process!)... But there were great time constraints and I had the good fortune of sitting in the debriefing group at the end, where there was more space for this kind of an interaction.
Overall, what was most meaningful for me? I think, it is the insights I got into the following questions (which is also, I realise now, a reflection of my what questions I was carrying with me):
- Why does a complexity perspective mean that should we look at ourselves as explorers rather than experts or traditional researchers? And how do we go about our exploration? Why is it important to do so in a collaborative manner?
- What would a large scale, multi-stakeholder collaborative action research - with the objective of understanding how civic driven change actually happens - look like and how would it operate?
- How I should deal with the ugly thing we know as the logical framework (LFA) in the coming 6th Comprehensive Plan and what kind of meaningful, participatory, qualitative-focused learning systems could be used to compensate for the horrible void that is the LFA?
- What is the potential for taking up the strengthening of the inter-organisational platform for civil society learning and self-governance at the Udaipur level? How should I get started and who can I to talk to for this (thanks to Pradeep and Marieke)?
An interesting opportunity has also emerged for Seva Mandir to work with Fons and Co on the narrative based collaborative action research on civic driven change, including - but not limited to - child-centred change. It also seems to reverberate with conversations we have been having within Seva Mandir on the topic of distilling our own understanding of the change process (including the one we had during the annual camp) and our oft repeated pride in being an organisation that learns from and builds its knowledge based on experience!
Some questions, however, that I'm still not totally comfortable with are the following:
To what extent and what kind of NGO intervention can still permit us to call what happens as Civic Driven? For example, if Seva Mandir initiates a dialogue, makes available certain resources and provides facilitation inputs as a result of which citizens begin to organise themselves around certain resources, issues, commons and values - does this count as civic driven change? Where is that fine line between civic driven and not civic driven change (or perhaps we'd be better off talking about a gradient from totally self-organised civic driven on the one side to coordinated with some civic participation on the other)? It seems to me that the nature of the change that we talk about has some pretty serious implications and this need to be unpacked.
In any case, the wonderful company and conversations at dinner provided a great end to a very interesting day! So thanks to all for making it possible!
Labels:
action research,
collaboration,
learning,
social change
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
