Joseph Devine

The Paradox of Sustainability: Reflections on NGOs in Bangladesh

Drawing on research from Bangladesh, this article questions the dominance of a narrow view of sustainability that rests predominantly on financial considerations. The push for financial sustainability has produced ambiguous results and, more important, has also introduced a degree of uncertainty into the relationship nongovernmental organizations maintain with their members. This article will argue that in the context of Bangladesh, an accurate notion of sustainability rests more on social and political considerations than on economic ones. Fundamental tensions exist between social/political and economic considerations, and paradoxically, the relentless pursuit of one may undermine efforts to establish the other. The article therefore seeks to subject the logic and validity of efforts to promote sustainability among nongovernmental organizations in Bangladesh to theoretical and empirical scrutiny.

NGOs, Politics and Grassroots Mobilisation: Evidence from Bangladesh

Since the early 1980s non-governmental organisations have become a major phenomenon in development, and a focus of attention for academics and practitioners alike. The study of NGOs tends to emphasise their role in the delivery of welfare services and pays less at-tention to their political significance. This despite numerous claims about the contribution of NGOs to civil society and democracy. The article draws on ethnographic research carried out in Bangladesh to explore in more detail the NGO–politics nexus. It demonstrates that there is a strong but complex link between NGOs and politics. On the one hand it confirms the political nature of NGO intervention and activity. On the other hand it highlights how the organisation of politics through NGOs reproduces clientelistic forms of action. This apparent paradox runs counter to most of the assumptions underpinning NGO research. The article closes by exploring this paradox and offering illustrations of how it may actually be an effective form of social action for the poor.

Religion, Politics and the Everyday Moral Order in Bangladesh

Abstract Commentaries on contemporary Bangladesh give increasing attention to the role of religion, particularly its more “fundamentalist” forms, in public politics. Here we offer an alternative analysis that explores the significance of religion in peoples everyday lives, concentrating on its articulation in community politics. We draw on an important local distinction between dharma understood as a moral foundation for life and dharma understood more narrowly as “religion.” Our empirical analysis suggests that it is the former sense of dharma which has greater relevance for the moral order of the community, and is used to evaluate and structure its social and political institutions, including those identified as “religious.” This perspective furnishes fresh insights into the dynamic relationship between religion, politics and social change in modern Bangladesh.

Negotiating religion in everyday life: A critical exploration of the relationship between religion, choices and behaviour

One of the characteristics most often associated with religion is that it is a discrete source of value that shapes peoples attitudes and behaviour. In some cases, these values may be negative such as submission or violence; in other cases, religion is seen to promote positive values such as charity and social justice. In recent years, the international development community has reawakened an interest in religion, and has directly embraced the assumption that religion is foundational of peoples values, seeking how best to tap into the potential positive values while mitigating against the more negative values. This paper critically explores the assumptions behind this approach. It argues that there is no straightforward relationship between belonging to a religion and the values which inform ones actions and decisions. Drawing on fieldwork research from India, the paper shows that it is impossible to disentangle religion from its interaction with the social, economic and political contexts in which it is lived. The paper concludes by deriving some implications of this for the way the international development community engages with religion.

Contesting the Boundaries of Religion in Social Mobilization

This article seeks to contribute to an understanding of the dynamics of religion in social mobilization. It argues that existing approaches to the study of the role of religion in social mobilization have been insufficiently nuanced and have failed to probe the multiple and often contradictory influences that religion can have on mobilization channels. On the basis of three qualitative case studies from Malaysia, Bangladesh and the United Kingdom, we identify three key factors of religion that can catalyze social mobilization: theological resources; religious spaces; and the interaction of both with the wider context. This leads us to conclude that the boundaries of the ‘religious’ dimension of social mobilization are fluid, and that the religious element of social mobilization can never be disentangled from its social and political context.

Meeting emerging global policy challenges: positioning social policy between development and growth?

This special issue combines contributions to a series of collaborative workshops and conference symposia of the UK Social Policy Association, the UK Development Studies Association and the Indian Social Policy Initiative held at the University of Bath (26–27 April 2013), the University of Birmingham (16 November 2013), O.P. Jindal Global University (24–25 March 2014) and the University of Sheffield (14–16 July 2014) asking: What is the Role of Social Policies in Meeting Emerging Global Policy Challenges and What Can Social Policy and International Development Studies Learn from Each Other? The main starting point for these different activities was the recognition that researchers and practitioners from social policy and international development studies increasingly face similar emerging global policy challenges at conceptual, methodological, technical and practitioner levels. In a world that is rapidly changing, increasingly connected and uncertain, the need and opportunity for fruitful intellectual collaboration between the two academic fields of inquiry is greater than ever. This Special Issue intends to take this initiative forward by covering different perspectives and approaches that examine the intellectual distinction between social policy and international development studies and look to develop a shared theoretical framework for global applied policy analysis. More specifically, it aims to explore the role of productivist and protective welfare activities and provide new insights into the particularities of global (informal) welfare regimes and the cross-cultural complexities of policy-making in the post-2008 financial crisis era. There is a recognised link between social policy and international development and a growing awareness of the need to establish social policy studies at the forefront of growth agendas at national and international levels. Contributions to the development of social policies in action is particularly pressing in middle-income countries such as the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) and MINT (Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria and Thailand) where growth has been relatively strong but where social problems such as large-scale material poverty and inequality act as a brake on potential (see, e.g. Surender & Walker, 2013). The necessity to engage with the concerns of social policy internationally is evidenced further by the existence of trends that affect all countries including persistent and multidimensional barriers to well-being in richer countries leaving large proportions of their populations, particularly children, highly vulnerable, insecure and socially

Governance, rights and the demand for democracy: evidence from Bangladesh

Since its Independence in 1971, Bangladesh has made remarkable progress in terms of reducing poverty levels, achieving high levels of economic growth over a sustained period of time, and meeting its Millennium Development Goals (MDG) targets set by the United Nations. With some justification, Bangladesh is considered an international development success story, and the country appears to be well on track to meet its policy target of becoming a middle-income country by 2021, the same year the country will celebrate 50 years of Independence. This book explores the central issue of Bangladeshi politics: the weakness of governance. The coexistence of a poor governance track record and a relatively strong socioeconomic performance makes Bangladesh an intriguing case which throws up exciting and relevant conceptual and policy challenges. Structured in four sections - Political Settlement, Elites and Deep Structures; Democracy, Citizenship and Values; Civil Society, Local Context and Political Change; Informality and Accountability – the book identifies and engages with these challenges. Chapters by experts in the field share a number of conceptual and epistemological principles and offer a combination of theoretical and empirical insights, and cover a good range of contemporary issues and debate. Employing a structurally determinist perspective, this book explains politics and society in Bangladesh from a novel perspective. Academics in the field of governance and politics in developing countries, with a focus on South Asia and Bangladesh will welcome its publication.

CHAPTER 1 Sharing the well: towards sustained eradication of extreme poverty in Bangladesh

This chapter uses two metaphors to explore the moral and practical dimensions of extreme poverty eradication. The first metaphor, ‘Leaving no-one behind’, currently dominates policy discussions and broadly sees the eradication of extreme poverty as the consequence of economic growth and prosperity. In contrast the chapter outlines an alternative approach, captured in the ‘sharing the well’ metaphor, which focuses much more on redistribution and rights. The chapter argues that although both approaches are laudable, their differences are important. Crucially, the ‘Sharing the well’ approach, although politically challenging, has roots in values shared by the people of Bangladesh. This arguments helps contextualize the different chapters of the book.