By
Moin Qazi, New Age Islam
19
September 2023
Our leaders
are not tired of repeatedly boasting about India achieving the
"distinction" of becoming the world's fifth-largest economy and that
it will soon become the third-largest. The media, too, does not care to tell
the nation that the size of a country's economy is a highly misleading
indicator of the actual economic conditions of the country and its people.
Becoming 5th is hardly worth being proud of for a country with now the world's
most significant population. "Size" of the economy is only used by
the world market and political forces for their interests because, for foreign
markets, the population size is essential from the point of view of the
possibility of exporting their products to that country.
We have
just finished holding the G-20 summit and declared it a big win for our
country. Of course, there are some points worth being admired. But what is not
being told is the darker side of our achievements. G-20 is mainly about the
economy and not about politics. It will be interesting to see where these 20
members stand regarding the per capita income. See the following table, which
gives the names of the 20 participants along with their per capita income
according to the latest IMF figures:
GDP (In USD) Per Capita By Country (IMF Report)
Argentina, 13,709
Australia, 64,964
Brazil, 10,373
Canada, 52,722
China, 13,721
France, 44,408
Germany, 51,383
India, 2,601
Indonesia, 5,016
Italy, 36,812
Japan, 35,385
Mexico, 12,673
Russia, 14,403
Saudi Arabia,
29,922
South Africa, 6,485
South Korea, 33,393
Turkey, 11,931
U.K. 46,371
U.S., 80,034
European Union 39,940
When I was
compiling this table, it shocked me that in terms of per capita income, India
stands last among all these member countries. India's per capita income of
2,601 US dollars is significantly less than most other countries, the nearest
being Indonesia, with around double our figures. How can then we be proud of
our economy?
This
becomes even more depressing when we understand that even per capita income is
only an incomplete reflection of the people's actual conditions because of the
country's prevailing income inequality. According to reports, the wealthiest 1%
of Indians own 58% of the wealth, while the richest 10% of Indians own 80% of
the wealth. This trend has been consistently increasing in recent years,
meaning the rich are getting richer much faster than the poor.
As far as
poverty is concerned, according to the United Nations Millennium Development
Goals (MDG) programme, "80 million people out of 1.2 billion Indians (in
2019), roughly equal to 6.7% of India's population, lived below the poverty
line of $1.25 and 84% of Indians lived on less than $6.85 per day." Still, we feel proud of spending huge sums on
the bonanza of G-20.
Interestingly,
the Opposition hardly raises these fundamental questions. Why should
politicians bother about these figures when market forces dominate the world
economy? They, too, want to keep the market forces happy. They would never take
a pledge to reduce the percentage of the wealth held by the top 1 per cent. And
why should the media bother when the same market forces pamper them? We naively
equated poverty with economic deprivation alone without delving deeper into the
underlying threads.
Policy
swings or paralysis fulfil basic human aspirations for health, security, and
the chance to contribute productively and creatively to society. They
underutilize and misuse valuable human resources, and they often give rise to
political or social turmoil, marked by ideological or ethnic polarization,
which then leads either to wide policy swings or to policy paralysis.
Our second
broad conclusion was that sustained growth requires a coherent, adaptable
strategy based on shared values and goals, trust, and some degree of consensus.
Of course, achieving that is easier said than done.
Rural
policies following this approach should be designed and implemented in the way
best adapted to the needs of the communities they serve. One way to ensure this
is to invite local stakeholders to take the lead and participate. The
involvement of local actors includes the population at large, economic and
social interest groups and representative public and private institutions.
Capacity building is an essential component of the bottom-up approach,
involving:
1. awareness raising, training, participation and
mobilization of the local population to identify the strengths and weakness of
the area (analysis);
2. involvement of different interest groups in
drawing up a regional development strategy;
3. Establish clear criteria for selection at a
local level of appropriate actions (projects) to deliver the design.
Those
programmes have become essential buffers against drought and landlessness in
many places. Still, they also have been plagued by waste and corruption, a
record cited by those who argue that a nationwide employment programme would
funnel more money, not to the poor, but to corrupt politicians, bureaucrats and
local power brokers. Several organizations have shown that such projects can
work and that grass-roots capitalism is one of the best routes out of poverty.
While it
will not solve India's deep-rooted agriculture problems, better information can
significantly boost food production and rural incomes. Although there is much
discussion in public forums about involving stakeholders in the appropriate
development of the society in which the poor live, poor people rarely get the
opportunity to develop their agenda and vision or set terms for the involvement
of outsiders. The participatory paradigm illustrates that people participate in
plans and programs we—outsiders—have designed. There is little opportunity for
them to articulate their ideas and seldom an institutional space where their
ingenuity and creativity in solving their problems can be recognized, respected
and rewarded. The situation of the proverbial cart having been placed before
the horse. Any such project requires meticulous planning and careful
implementation, involving complete and accurate information on all the
essential variables to be dealt with: socio-cultural, environmental, and
economic aspects.
A better
approach to eliminate poverty, however, would be to make the environment
conducive to increased flow of credit to people experiencing poverty, leaving
micro-level credit management to financial institutions and transferring the
subsidy from the individual level to the community level for human capital
formation of people experiencing poverty and developing physical valuable
infrastructure to them. The government's involvement must be confined to macro
affairs such as policy formulation and framing incentives.
Proper
development involves a transformation of the State of a human being. However,
such a transformation must have those affected's active involvement and
participation. Actual development transforms groups without destroying their
culture, traditions, environment, livelihood and social patterns, which must be
preserved and protected because they are central to the very life of the
people. The forests around them provide food, medicine, and livelihood, a
sustainable solution to the triple whammy of food security, healthcare and
employment, which the State is ill-equipped to address. Actual development
shouldn't translate into action, as seen by the elite. Growth must be seen by
those whose lives are to be transformed.
We need
empathy—not a form of empathy that comes from superiority, but one born from
profound humility. Empathy helps understand and treat one another better and is
a key currency in a world defined by connectivity and change. Empathy doesn't
just mean treating others better — it means doing better.
A
development strategy that has been successful in one village may not
necessarily give the same results in a neighbouring town. Hence, the renewed
emphasis of planners on area-specific plans. Transplanting cultures has been a
favourite idea of armchair development experts, but time has shown that nothing
could be as damaging as the imposition of an alien civilization. Society,
however nascent, has a social and cultural apparatus that regulates and
balances divergent traits and traditions. I have always been guided by Paul
Devitt's famous words: "The poor are often inconspicuous, inarticulate and
unorganized. Their voices may not be heard at public meetings in communities
where it is customary for only the big men to put in their views. It is rare to
find a body or institution that adequately represents the poor in a certain
community or area."
The land,
water, forests and environment reforms will be ineffective if they don't give
space to the voice of those affected by the reforms. These communities comprise
eighty-five per cent of the country's population. Yet, none fined even half a
per cent of space in these seminars and conferences, particularly when we are
deliberating programmes targeted towards women.
The idea is
to use local wisdom before we involve expertise from outside. Encourage private
initiative without commercializing education. Give private industry more
responsibility, more space, and more freedom. As things stand now, the formal
system alone cannot answer the challenge of rural education. It destroys
initiative and creativity. Tackling poverty requires a fundamentally different
approach: one that encourages the initiative, creativity, and drive from below
that must be at the core of any transformation of their lives that is to be
lasting.
The failure
of so many development interventions over the past half century can be partly
attributed to their lack of rootedness in the society they were designed to
change. Development interventions must engage with people's identities and
values, whether individuals, communities, organizations or nations, to catalyze
fundamental change.
Enhancing
the quality of growth to promote sustainability, equity, and inclusivity will
require economists to connect their skills and perspectives with those of
others. They must combine forces with political, institutional and social
analysts and, crucially, with the people in public, private and civil sectors
positioned to make real change happen. The new Sustainable Development Goals
are fundamentally questioning the equation of development with economic growth.
Development is about demand and delivery. Governments and development agencies
will learn to respond if people know what to ask for. People lack awareness and
access to the asymmetry that prevails, while policy designers have little touch
with reality.
I also painfully understood that our
government still has the mindset of being a provider, a patronizing institution
which expects citizens to be benign 'subjects'. We are still far from getting
citizens engaged as empowered participants in such programmes.
In civil
society, we need to give the State a different perspective on people, poverty
and entitlements. Empower them with information which will reduce the power
asymmetry between them and the government.
We have to become facilitators and start
empowering communities so that they can explore solutions from within. They
resist doing the hard work of thinking through their problems and building
their capacities to find answers. Development is now so beneficiary-driven and
politicized at the village level that building human capital is becoming more
challenging.
Most of
them have little understanding of ground realities. There must be genuine
respect and concern for native intelligence and community wisdom. Only when we
democratize development will sustainable, people-centric human development
happen.
-----
Moin Qazi is the author of the bestselling book, Village Diary of a
Heretic Banker. He has worked in the development finance sector for almost four
decades.
URL: https://newageislam.com/spiritual-meditations/redesign-development-architecture/d/130706
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism