Occasional Papers in Sociology and Anthropology - Volume 3, 199

Pyakuryal, Kailash N.

English

Apollo (Cambridge)

Community Development as astrategy to Rural DevelopmentKailash Pyakuryal1Community Development can be viewed as an approachto rural development. Community development focuses more oninteracting human beings within a geographical boundary wher-eas. rural development embraces more an ecological perspective.Human settlements are found both in rural, as well as,urban areas, but rural development programs are designed toaffe?t .rural people. Commonly addressed issues are rural poverty, ,Iliteracy, ill health, regional disparity, unequal power orthe other. Rural development aims to improve the standard ofliving of rural people. Thus community development can b_ e~iew~d as a straregy to rural development. fhis paper is organ-Ized Into 3 seCtions. First section deals with the concept ofcommunity development, second seCtion deats with the rise andfall of community development and the last section ends withthe concluding remarks.1 Ptolessot 01 Rutal Sociology, CenltalOepettment 01 Sociology and Antht-tipology, Ttibhuvan Univetsity, Kittiput, Kathmandu.j81. Community OBvelopmBniAfter the rigorous analysis of all the available 44definitions of community, George A. Hillery Jr. in his article"Definitions of Community: Areas of Agreement" has attemptedto generalise the following:i. That there is no complete agreement among sociologists asto the nature of community,i i. That certain ecologists have been the most radical deviantin formulating the concept of community,iii. That with the ecological relations viewpoint excluded,others agree on the social institutions,iv. That in defining rural community they agreed mostly thatrural community has an area in which social interation andone or more common bonds were found (Hillery pp. 111-123).The term community has very loosely been used elsewhere such as a "communily of sportsmen", "Buddhistcommunity", "International community", or"world community".Such usage do not communicate the sociological meaning ofthe term for discussion and analysis so for the purpose ofconceptual clarity, the following essential components could beconsidered to the meaning of a rural community in Nepal:i. There must be a group of interecting people on the basis ofmutual dependence and concern,i i. Who live in a well defined and limited geographical area,iii. Who have a sense of belonging or identification or commu-nity consciousness,iv. They have common social values, norms, and other aspectsof culture, andv. The community should have some necessary social insmu-tions i. e" schools, governing agency, credit agency etc.Community development can be viewed as 'Self-Help,Approach to Rural Development. Under the 'self-help' philosop-hy of developme~t there is an attempt made to enlist and inspirethe people in the determination of desirable change in goalsand in the implementation of program to bring about the chan-ge deemed desirable.Other agency,s role (outside the traget system) aree"pected to maintain neutrality in decision-making episodes yetthey play organizational and informational roles. This approachis appealing because of its apparent compatibility withdemocratic ideology.The distinctive feature of community development isthe participation by the people themselves in efforts to impro\.\9their levels of living with reliance as much as possible on theirown initiative; and the provision of technical and other servicesin ways which encourage initiative. self-help and mutual helpand make them more effective. The principal advantage cited bychampions of the self-help type of program (C. D.) is theinvolvement of the people therneslves in the decision and programimplementation processes. Such involvEment secures participa-tion and greminates the feeling of being involved in onesdestiny. Another advantage. frequently cited. is that localpersons are. Knowledgeous about their problems and people andthis lessens the risk of objectives being jeopardized because ofthe ignorance of local beliefs and customs which Characterizeoutside agents.The disadvantages of this approach can also be listed intwo droad headings: First is what may be called as the in-experi-ence and inertia of localities. local people seldom have thesophistication to comprehend problems in an over-all sensethat is think in the abstract about society-wide benefits.There is also a difficulty in keeping them interestedover a period of time. A lack of progress quickly dissipatestheir enthusiasm as volunteers any may even lead to morenegative reactions. The secDnd broad disadvantage of the sell-help approach is the complex nature of societal structures. Veryfew problems can be solved with only local resources. commun-ities seek and need governmental and non -governmentalassistance in varying degrees in Obtaining essential expertadvice, economic resources, and ,technological items· Thisinvolvement tends to negate idea of self-help to a certain extent.In summary then. the problems which tend to plag~e the plann-ers of C. D. programs are a function of the long and riskyvolunteer process and of the outsice hElp needed to get suchprograms under way and to bring them to a successful conclu-sion. These disadvantages are recognised by the practitionersof C. D. programs but are generally excused as a necessaryencumbrance of democratic process.2. Rise and Fall of Community DevelopmentSoon after the second world war. colonial empirescrumbled and foreign rulers departed, leaving the unfinishedtask of rural development for their successors. The old problEmsremained unsolved. complicatEd and formidable. For the newstates. putting their topsy-turvy house in order proved even moredifficult than regaining independence (note that Nepal alsofaced similar situation after the fall of Rana regime). The worldwas now devided into two conflicting camps: Socialist Campand American Camp. They built on their colonial foundationsand retained. almost unchanged. their political. economic andadministrative heritage. They made gradual rEform not revolut-ion and maintained intimate relations with their old masters.From 1950 onwards. America was the undisputedleader of the "free world" camp. The leader was determined torestrain, by hot or cold war. the expansion of radicalism. and tobOlster client nalions. The great leader started aid programs allaround the world. Apart from military aid. material aid wasgiven in the shape of loans. grants. capital and consumer goods.Technical aid was provided in the form of experts. advisors and60 61foreIgn training. And ideological aid flowed in through the diss-emination of orthodox economic and sociological wisdom. Inthe dawn of the fifties, rulers of many penurious states hopefullyregarded America as the good fairy and foreign aid as a magicwand.During this decade, Americans sponsored two greatrural programs. Community Devl lopment and Agricultural Exten-sion. The former was newly fashioned by American Sociolo~ists.while the latter was an old product of the American land grantcolleges. G. D. promised political peace by including everyonein a harmonious community and outting an end to conflicts. Itpromised economic prosperity by inculcating the desile fordevelopment and by securing common participation.As a weaponto the cold war. C, D. offered the quietism of consensus as asuperior alternative to turbulent radicalism.C. D, relied mainly on a government village level work-er (VLW) as the agent of charge. In Nepal too. communitydevelopment approach was imported from India under the nameof Village Development Program in 1951; and first the VLWs andlater the Junior Technical Assistants (JTA) were the agents ofchange. This change agent was advised to collaborate closelywith local people!"natura'" leader Evidently VLW/JTA came tohelp everybody, not by fighting for the weak against the strong.but by uniting all of them, weak or strong. into a fraternalcommunity. Surely all could join hands for the sake ofdevelopment.The VLW was a catalytic- agent who would unite villa-gers and help them find their felt and unfelt needs. He wouldteach them to form comRlittees and councils for the completionof the projects. Now, and then a VLW would also encourageand stimulate the villagers by finding matching grants andtechnical assi,tance. A VLW was a multipurpose agent. He wo-uld combine the functions of a missionary. an organizer a techni-cian anda patron.C.D.aspired tocoordinate the activiti~s of otherdepartments and follow an integrated approach Its vision ofdevelopment included the improvement of everything: soctalharmony. economic production. health end. recreation. In thefifties C. D. became a world-wide movement. Nepal also did notremain untouched, But its decline was as.sudden as its rise In1964 USAID abolished its C D. division. In India too. after adecade of greet faith and enormous investment in C D, as lhebest stralegy for rural development, suddenly the emphasisshilted from C. D. to modernizing agriculture, building ruralinstitutions, perchayats. coo~eratives and land rerorm. Nepalfollowed the same path and since C. D. was quietly abandonedby both parents America and India, in Nepal too C. D. eitherwas modified to various other kinds of program such as areadevelopment or integraled rural development program or it gotlimited to the project level in various externally funded develop-ment activities.Traditional practice of self help had been in operation inNepal from the historical past. Labour exchange i~ on.e of suchmutually benefiting activities. Semi-formal organlzallons suchas Municipality Cleaning office or the Chandra Weaving Extens-ion Society date back to around early 1920s. Similarly Develop-ment Board. Agriculture Council. welfare Society and NationalPlanning Committees were established during the period 1935 to1950 (K. C, 1990). Almost all of these Non-Governmental (NG)and Governmental (G) organizations were basically meant forwelfare activities.Community Development Approach was introduced inNepal only in 1951 under the name of village Development. Asstated above. though welfare activities at the community levelwere not new to the Nepalese people. yet, externelly introducedCD programs lacked the integration of local wisdom, values andespirations and thus were found unsuitable and could notsustain the community Supply of inputs such as improved seedsand chemical fertilizers in heavily subsidized rates or free distri-bution of medicines were some of the features of CD program.Assumpllon that larmers would continue to edopt thosetechnologies after they knew and practised them came to befutile. Rather heavy subsidizatj;n had a negative effect onfarmers; it made them more dependent on GOS and/or NGOSwhich were responsible for it. Besides GOS, there were 13Nepali NGOS at the nationTI level, 5 at the regional level and154 at the 10c,1 level. Si,nilarly, t'lere were SO registered intErna-tional NGOs of which 14 were directly related to CO activitiesin Nepal (K. C , 1990).Program developed by tr,e community members them-selves which sought supplemer.tary assistance from o"tsideagencies are different from Externally thought andbrought prOlram which later sought participation fromthe community members. In Nepal, most of the CD typeprograms reflect outside agency's (GOs and NGOs) valuejudgements on deciding and implementing thc program. Mostlythey tend to be different from people's needs and aspirationsand hence lack people's participation at the desirable level.Thus CD type program appear to be of ad hoc in nlture andafter the figurative completion of the project, its impact usuallybecome invisible; it is not sustained and the project rarely getsthe status of an on· going people's program.Khan (19771 mentions four crucial imperfection ofCO.i. It promoted wellare activities more effectively than produc-tive activities. Particularly. it seemed incapable of solvingthe national food crisis.ii. CO did not succeed significantly in forming harmoniouscommunities It does not secure general participation. Thepoorer classes remained as they were, apathetic andsceptical.iii. CO's reli]nce on its own agents and total collaboratiQnwith estaolished leaders further confirmed the elitist and64paternalist bias, a colonial heritage, and inhibited thegrowth of true local initiative.Iv. CD's role as a generalist captain and coordinator was notacceptable to the specialist departments, Agriculturalexperts especially complained about the inadequacy of amultipurpose VLW as their agent.3. Concluding RemlrksIt is generally held that economic development occursIn a succession of capitalist stages and that today's under-developed countries are still in a stage. sometimes depicted as anoriginal stage, of history through which the now developedcountries passed long ago. It is also widelY believed that thecontemporary underdevelopment of a country can be understoodIS the product or reflection solely of its own economic, political,Bocial and cultural characteristics or structure.Yet historical research do not support these viewpoints, Research demonstrates that contemporary under-development is in large part the historical product of past andcontinuing economic and other relations between the satelliteunderdeveloped and the noW developed metropolitan countries(Frank, Andre G.• 1966).When we examine this metropolis - satellite structure,We find that each of the satellites, (including underdevelopedNepal), serves as an instrument to suck capital or economicsurplus out of its own satellites and to channel part of thissurplus to the world metropolis of which all are satellites.The rural towns, which are themselves satellites of theurban metropolis - - and through the' laller of the worldmetropolis - - are in turn rural centres around which theirOWn local satellites orbit.That present underdevelopment of Nepal can beexpllined f[olT) this conceptual frameWOrk and is the result of itscentury old participation in the process of world capitalistdevelopment. The rural-urban relationship makes a largersatellite - metropolis orbit to its giant neighbour which furtherbecomes a satellite to the metropolis Europe.The goal of development may never be achieved byimporting sterile stereotypes from the metropolis which do notcorrespond to their economic reality and do not respond to theirliberating political needs. A more historical, hOlistic, and struc-tural approach may help the people of the underdevelopedcountries to understand the causes and eliminate the reality oftheir development of underdevelopment and their underdevelop-ment of development.Development is built on human aspirations and it ismultifaceted: economic, social, political and intellectual. SinceCD has a democratic ideology, it deserves revitalized atlentionand promotion.However, a theory which integrates micro-level ideals(such as CD) with the macro-level needs (human aspirations)have to be developed.In such a situation, program of development, such asImproved agricultural technologies, belter transportation andCOmmunication, education and medical health and so on wouldrather sharpen social conflicts.The majority of the peasants are too poor to benefitfrom such technologies. New opportunities created by suchpurely technical progress of development will be mostly utitizedbY the upper and middle strata. Since progress of developmentwould further sharpen social conflicts, it indicates that suchprogress may lead to unanticipated results.It has been observed that progress of developmentcould be more effective if they are applied by new politicalpower (Galeski. n, d.) which emerged during the process ofchange in the general socia-economic situation. the new powerwould be temporarily free of basic social conflicts and program01 development could be more flexible in creating a new socio-economic system and new social structure, Since Nepal ispessing through similar situations at present, there is everyreason we believe change which leads to prosperity.It is a challenge to the practitioners of rural develop-ment how a rural community, as a peripheral satellite, could beprotected from its central metropolis and yet be brought intothe mainstream of development.At present, there appears to be more pronounced classconsciousness in Nepal than before. Class conflict between'haves' and 'have nots' is sharpening. Nepal is a country withpredominently rural or rather peasant population with a lowlevel of industrialization, a high level of unemployment rate,poverty, low level of education, and ill health. In countries ofsuch social structure, the main social conflict arise betweenpeasantry and landed aristocracy.66Rlflilnces:Frenk, Andre G. 1966Geleski, B.Hillery, George A. n.d."The Development of Underdevelop-ment", Monthly Review.n. d. "Conflicts and Changes as anAspect of Development", Paperpresented during the author's stay intheU. S. under the United States Depart-ment of State Exchange Program."Definations of Community: Areasof Agreement". Handout distributedin the Course Soc. 978. MSU.67Khan, Akhter H. 1977K.C .• Krish S, 1990Ten Decades of Rural Development_Lessons from India, East Lansing:MSU.Community Development - TheNepalese Context, Kathmandu: Societyfor Community DevelopmentProfessionals.*National Integration' InNepalD,.. GanlJh Gurung*- Dr. Bishnu Bhandari1. Conc.pt .nd D.flniti.n:National integration is an emotional attachment tonation (Etzimi. 1965): a process as well as an end product(Angel. 1941); a condition achiev,able by a nation (Aberle andFordon as quoted in Doshi. 1978,' and 1989); a condition andprocess (Ghurye, 1968; and Cohan. & Middleton as quoted inDoshi, 1978). Ghurye emphasizes that it consists of two eleme-nts: political integration and social integration. All these abovedefinitions suggest that integration is a drawing together ofthose elements into something more cohesive with the partslinked more closely together co-existence, It is through thisprocess that people develop a deep sense of we' feeling andbelongingness and thereby a feeling of national loyality.Through this process, it is possible to maintain a harmonious andlively relationship between the various structural components of°lecrurer and Reader respeclives al Tribhuvan University would like toth'nk their colleagues lor Iheir commenls and suggeslions.69

Community Development as a Strategy to Rural Development

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Apollo (Cambridge)