Women, unity, gifts and spirituality: the foundation for women led community development in Delwara

In the small multi-caste town of Delwara, a women's group has been formed. This group is a platform for women to come together on a common platform across all kinds of traditional divides - caste, religion, class, etc. - to become agents of their own destiny. This morning, I spent a few hours with the group exploring some of the following questions:

• what is unity?
• how is unity created?
• how is unity destroyed?
• how is unity sustained?

Through these questions we covered a wide range of issues: the importance of knowing each other; what does it take to develop a meaningful relationship; making space in the heart for each other; listening with the heart to each others' stories; being there for each other; striving to understand each other; not letting divisive politics fragment the group (a responsibility of each individual); and the need to continuously nurture the group and retain courage in the face of all manner of challenges.

We also discussed the idea that each person present was bringing with them a gift. The group belongs to the women and it is nourished by the gifts that the women themselves bring. What are these gifts that the women bring? The ability to listen. A readiness to help those in need in whatever way possible. A spirit of cooperation and assistance. A desire to make a positive contribution in the world.

It struck me, as we engaged in this conversation, that we had reached a special level in the group. There was an emotional intensity, a sense of being part of something deep - perhaps even spiritual. The group was moving as a whole in a container that reverberated with the sense of collectivity that resonated from the women sitting there. This may only be my take on it though I do plan to check up on this feeling soon.

In some ways, I feel that I crossed a barrier, a boundary in the way that we usually dialogue. It is as though we made a shift from talking about mere practicalities or technicalities of rights, and government and frameworks and water tanks and pension schemes to tapping into the very soul of the women and its collective expression in their group. The words and emotions that were being exchanged were expressions of that individual and collective soul and, at the same time, the food that nourishes it. A deepening reminder of the fact that it is this level of conversation that connects the individual woman and her own soul to that of the group. In this sense it was both transcendental and palpable.

And what this really brings me to is something that I have felt for a long time but never really made a formal point of - and that is that this thing we call development really needs to be reframed as a spiritual process; a process of collective spiritual evolution. I do not feel that this is a dimension that finds adequate expression in the existing discourse around development - even in Seva Mandir. As we work on non-formal education centres, or village institutions, deal with targets and logical frameworks, worry about accountability and transparency, and so on... are we giving due attention to the fact that we are engaged in a process of spiritual evolution? Is there a space for this?

As an afternote: I really enjoyed working with Gulabji (who has replaced me as project coordinator in Delwara) today. He gave space where it was desired and support where it was required. He also was able to bring together spirituality across Hindu-Muslim divides in a seamless and natural manner and although we had not discussed our programme at any great length beforehand, it felt as though we were playing a familiar game. So my deep thanks and respect go out to this special soul!

social capital - possibility is in our hands

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!

visions, dreams, problem-solving and change

So, I’m pretty sure that I’m not saying anything new here (I have been thinking about it for a while and have taken inspiration from numerous sources and even woven it into my own practice)… but it does kind of strike me as being rather important… here it goes:

• Vision-driven change is completely different from problem-solving-driven change.
• For the most-part, people are uncomfortable with moving away from problem-solving
• Vision-driven change requires an understanding of the problems but, instead of beginning with the problems, begins with tapping into people’s dreams, unearthing them, sharing them, building common dreams and then catalyzing collective action around these dreams
• Vision-driven change and problem-solving-driven change are not mutually exclusive… but putting the vision gives a better context for the problem-solving
• Vision-driven change is all about creating new realities – this gives a real sense of moving forward towards something that is desirable rather than simply away (or aside from) something that is bad
• Problem-solving change is all about trying to get out of slippery holes – getting out of one doesn’t mean that you haven’t fallen into another
• Vision-driven change is holistic, and presents an inclusive and clear goal that people can both relate and aspire to
• Problem-solving change is fragmented, and often fails to consider how one problem is linked to the next – it also often encourages looking for solutions at levels that are far beyond people’s grasp

I have nothing against problem-solving. What I do lament, however, is the striking absence of vision-driven change. We go into a place and focus first and foremost on what the problems are. I even heard a very senior, experienced staff member (perhaps a little too old now?) say that one of the jobs we do is to show people dreams… as if the people didn’t have their own dreams before we turned up!?!? I was a little bit taken aback at this and wondered about the extent to which we may take ownership for people’s dreams and, correspondingly, perhaps, the extent that we fail to really tap into the potential of really engaging people voluntarily in taking action to realize their dreams…

One thing is for sure: the dream-based leadership workshop that we conducted in Delwara – which included an exercise for linking people’s own actions to the realization of their dreams – worked! Within a few days, a Muslim lady – a local leader – was out and about in her neighbourhood trying to collect money from each household to cover the cost of getting the neighbourhood cleaned on a regular basis. And just the other day, I was translating for a volunteer studying the relationship between women and water in Delwara, and two women quite clearly recounted: “it’s not that we didn’t have dreams before the Citizen’s Forum was established, it’s just that we didn’t have a way of realizing them”.

This is an urgent plea to not let ourselves start trying to possess other people’s dreams and to focus instead on trying simply to listen to, know and understand them, to get people to own up to having them and to cultivate a passion for realizing them – both individually and collectively!

I sincerely believe that these dreams are the source from which any glimmer of hope for positive social change emerges. As such, they are worthy of unfathomable respect.

Post Delwara Realisations

A view of Delwara's roofscape at sunrise while having morning chai at the house of the former Secretary of the Citizens' Development Forum

Today, sitting in Jaipur airport, on my way back from a fantastic day with Fons and team (to be discussed in more detail in the forthcoming post), I find myself remembering Delwara.

I'm not really a believer in regrets. I much prefer the idea of learning from the past in a positive, constructive way rather than dwelling in past failings or shortcomings. Having said this, I will permit myself a couple of backward looking thoughts in the context of Delwara.

First, I wish I had known about blogging while I was in Delwara. I kept a diary in an almost fanatical manner during my time there and was also working on putting together a website. If only I had thought of putting together a blog I could have killed more birds with one stone than you could shake a stick at (not that I am in favour of killing birds with stones). Based on this realisation, I have taken a vow to cover any project that I have the good or bad fortune of embarking on through blogging. It will be my tribute to the world and all the people who are part of my efforts.

Second, I wish I had not been (a) so arrogant; and (b) so confused about my role. Of course, there is nothing I could have done about it at the time - because that's probably where I was at as a person... But if I hadn't been so fixed on doing something related to Planning Monitoring and Evaluation - and more specifically Outcome Mapping - at the outset, I might have been better able to really engage in the change process.

I feel that I placed all kinds of barriers on my role and didn't quite manage to do what Ajay had advocated (going about and having meaningful conversations) - which, to be honest, seemed far too unfocused for me at the time... and my understanding was that more than anything, the project needed a fancy, participatory visioning and M&E kind of a process (which it did but not at that point)... Admittedly, I did manage quite a bit of what Ajay suggested, but still... far too bounded by my own thoughts. Easy to say in retrospect, I suppose.

Finally, I thought it would be good to include a link to a paper (soon to be published) that I prepared based on my experience in Delwara. Although it is rather long, and doesn't quite capture the full richness of what has taken place there (there are hundreds of good stories of change from Delwara), I feel that it distills the essence of the change process. It also offers what I believe may be some important insights in the context of the bigger debate on 'good governance'. Here are some snippets...

[...] this paper calls for a more culturally grounded understanding of the role of participation in the development of complex societies and is concerned as much with the value of participation in securing immediate instrumental objectives as in transforming the way that a fragmented citizenry relates to itself.

[...] it is critical to recognize that the Panchayat, at the local level, is a culturally embedded system and that its status is, by and large, a reflection of the society from which it is constituted. It is, therefore, only to be expected that an unaware, fragmented citizenry, deeply embroiled in conflicts of interest, mistrust, etc. will not be able to elect a Panchayat that is able to function in a democratic, transparent, accountable – or, for that matter, even remotely effective – manner. Nor will they be able to make or hold it accountable to themselves or to the village as a whole.

[...] the experience to date in Delwara indicates that when the starting point is a highly diverse and fragmented citizenry, establishing participatory governance systems is primarily a challenge of (i) enabling citizens to engage in processes of self-transformation; and (ii) enabling citizens to form relationships of mutual empowerment amongst themselves. To achieve this involves creating spaces and processes that support this transformation by bringing together citizens of diverse backgrounds in an organisational culture that embodies values of equality, dignity, respect, compassion, transparency, democratic deliberation, inclusiveness, collective strength and learning together.

An organized, cohesive and empowered community is far better placed to collaborate with and leverage the resources of the Panchayat than a fragmented citizenry. This means that the idea of responsible citizenship is about a great deal more than mobilizing people to demand resources from the state. It is, instead, about engaging people in a process where they have to confront themselves – both as individuals and as members of a social group. [...] Differences in ideology, values, worldviews, class, gender, geographical location - all provide pretexts for accentuating or shaping conflicts over decision-making processes. These conflicts have to be surfaced and [collectively] deconstructed in order for positive change to occur.

I will be thinking of ways to do justice to the Delwara experience in the coming months...