Navigating Polarization through Empathy: Insights from Research on Venezuelan Migration

By Posted on 1941 views

In this blog post, Fernando Garlin and Juliana Poveda explore the ethical and methodological dilemmas faced by researchers working with forced Venezuelan migrants in politically polarized contexts in Latin America. Through personal reflections, they delve into how the researcher’s identity shapes their relationship with the research participants and the interpretation of migratory realities, highlighting the tension between neutrality, authenticity and adaptability. They suggest that building human relationships and recognizing local complexities are essential for overcoming the double standards of engaged academics and fostering a deeper understanding of the migratory situation.

 

Image by Authors

In contexts marked by violent conflicts, institutional crises, fast changes and high degrees of political polarization, researchers encounter varying degrees of distrust, suspicion and openness from participants in the field. In our case, both of us have worked with Venezuelan migrants in Colombia, Spain and the United States. Amidst polarizing right- vs. left-wing politics and sentiments, the question constantly arises about how to present ourselves to our research participants: Is it important to disclose fully our personalities and positionalities? Should we embrace the neutrality and formality expected from researchers? Or ought we perform a mixture of authenticity and detachment to open the dialogue with our interviewees?

In this blog post, we use dialogue to explore how each one of us has addressed this situation. Our dialogue is itself a necessary collaboration to enrich our standpoints. Fernando is Venezuelan and Juliana is Colombian and we have both worked with Venezuelan migrants in the same region. However, we have noticed how our nationalities condition our gaze on forced migration.

Fernando: I spent more than a year on the Colombia-Venezuela border, between 2020 and 2022, mostly in Cúcuta. Over time, the whole issue of my ‘position’ gradually lost relevance in my reflections. Not because it stopped being important, but because, little by little, I started blending into my relationships, my surroundings and my belonging to an organization of Venezuelans in the region. So people already knew what my role was and where I stood before even agreeing to an interview: ‘Oh, he’s the guy who works with that aid organization and is interested in those issues.’

While researching violence, abuse and extreme precariousness, I think people cared less about my political stance and focused much more on evaluating my personality – for example, how witty, available or sensible I was. Those things gradually became way more important for coexisting and building human relationships. It helped me move beyond the usual observer-observed/participant mould.

That being said, my political position did matter in institutional spaces with humanitarian officers from the government and international cooperation sectors. My push for more quotas, aid and responses to the situation was seen as ‘left-wing; I pointed out things that needed improvement, to be denounced or reformed. But was I merely a ‘useful leftist’ being used to justify right-wing policies? In governmental or international cooperation settings, people even asked me ‘Are you here to help or not?’ Or was I just here to criticize, a ‘bad leftist’. Being aware of and discussing these issues allows us to be more critical of the role of the researcher in the field, not just as an observer but also as an actor.

I feel that my positionality has been shaped by these two tensions: local sensitivities and national policy discussions in each country. What about your experience, Juliana?

Juliana: I also arrived at the Norte de Santander region in Cúcuta in 2019. One of my first learnings was that authorities and NGOs make distinctions and present measures and procedures for Venezuelans as ‘novel, special and temporary’. Yet these legal measures were very disconnected from the daily life and reality of people forced to migrate into Colombia and join local communities. For example, it was enough to step away from the desk to figure out that the distinction between different types of ‘populations’ and ‘migrations’ might be artificial and pernicious. People with similar needs, newcomers and locals, were competing for attention and resources. Although it was undeniable that an extra layer of vulnerability came from the lack of regular migratory status of Venezuelans in Colombia, their needs and risks were similar to Colombian civilians within the context of armed conflict. This is not novel in forced migration dynamics; similar problems were experienced by Syrians and local communities in Turkey and Lebanon (Müller-Funk 2021).

My second learning was that, although bilateral relations shape migration policies, irrespective of whether there was a right- or left-wing government in Colombia, the change of political wing does not necessarily imply higher compliance with migrants’ rights. Pragmatism informs decision-making. Neither fiercely opposing Maduro’s authoritarian regime nor keeping cautiously silent about it has translated into an open recognition of Venezuelans as refugees or into higher standards of economic and social rights protection.

So, observing the dynamics of Colombian and Venezuelan migrant communities more broadly enabled me to seek a new stance from where I could take a critical and panoramic view of the law and its social context. Thus, I chose social research as a tool to address the law-context interaction. Fernando, how did ethnography help you to be closer to your research participants from an academic standpoint?

Fernando: In my ethnography, I try to distance myself from opinions or reactions that might make me seem like an outsider, as this could jeopardize trust. I prefer to get to know people and adapt to them, rather than taking a fixed stance. After all, every relationship is human, even in research. I find it hard that we must constantly remind ourselves and our colleagues of this. My job as an anthropologist is to explore what people think and how they think. And you have to allow space and time for that to happen.

This doesn’t mean I can’t speak out against authoritarian acts, violence or state terror in Venezuela, but when I’m doing research, all of that is just the backdrop so that the real protagonists – people – can come forward with their beliefs, ideas, opinions, sensitivities and emotions. So, my position leans more towards figuring out where to understand from, with whom and how to make sense of the confusion.

In your experience as a lawyer and researcher, how do you choose to position yourself? Do you have different behaviours, attitudes or decisions that you make depending on the people you’re meeting?

Juliana: From a socio-legal lens, I look at migration and refugee law from the opposing and interacting view of diverse stakeholders. These perspectives have enabled me to develop more reflexivity in my own gaze: conditions, experiences and assumptions. Thus, I can find nuances amidst the binaries suggested by the context and recognise my standpoint. Beyond the partisan right- vs. the left-wing binary (Roht-Arriaza y Martínez 2019), others have struck me: the attention and resources given to Venezuelan migrants undermine those for peacebuilding in Colombia. Or, its analogue, but from another side: the Colombian peace talks with the ELN and the FARC dissidents validate Maduro’s regime and neglect forced migrants.

I also find myself constantly justifying not only why I am researching from a Global North University but also why I am not researching my country’s affairs (Abasli and Elassal 2021). I find only ‘empathy’ as the answer. The experience of Colombian internally displaced people and forced migrants abroad should have also taught us to recognise vulnerability and depart from there. Hence, it is senseless to argue about whether the Colombian or Venezuelan crisis in the region deserves more attention, or should attract more international condemnation and cooperation. They are now entwined. I would rather begin with the fact that both civil societies deal with deep traumas due to polarization, failed democracies, inequality and violence (Bejarano 2011).

Once the polarization noise lowers, it is necessary to spotlight the main role of forced migrants (Clark-Kazak 2021). Nobody can speak on their behalf about how they face challenges such as ‘anti-migrant’ expressions in Global North countries (Achiume 2022). Hence, the researcher, alongside reflexivity, should collaborate with local organizations to protect the interests of forced migrants and amplify their voices (Harley, T. and Wazefadost 2023). Have you found another dichotomy? How did you solve it, Fernando?

Fernando: This might sound abstract and a bit lukewarm, but for me, anthropology isn’t activism or politics; it’s about building connections, relationships and concepts to understand activism and politics. Unfortunately, I’m not sure that understanding makes us ‘better’ at anything – maybe that’s just a knowledge-based illusion. That’s why I believe the role of the ethnographer and anthropologist is to accompany, shape and give meaning and strength to social experiences.

Beyond slogans about defending the most vulnerable – which I consider obvious unless you’re some kind of colonial exploiter – it’s about constantly searching for the spaces where the seeds of change, new futures and hopes for humanity can grow.

Our conclusion

Finally, we both agree that our positionalities are flexible. They evolve as we interact with our research participants and colleagues and reflect on our contexts and biases. We avoid identifying ourselves with binaries or exclusionary positions. That does not mean that we are ambivalent or vague. On the contrary, we believe that rather than being a bystander we should engage with others and collaborate, especially with those on the move. The more researchers can allow themselves to listen to any argument, trying to understand why someone may think or act in a particular way, the more their  work might be collaborative with migrants and local communities. In this sense, socio-legal approaches may be informed by ethnography. We thus believe that the most challenging positionality is imagining new horizons with others: constantly stepping outside oneself, time and again, and returning with multiple perspectives. Every researcher carries something of the migrant, always seeking to understand the other; and every migrant carries something of the researcher, in their own search for understanding.

References

Abasli,I. and Elassal A. (2023) “Why are you not doing research in your home country?” – The complexities of being from and doing research in the Global South. Impact of Social Science. Available from: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2023/12/05/why-are-you-not-doing-research-in-your-home-country-the-complexities-of-being-from-and-doing-research-in-the-global-south/ [Accessed Jul 21, 2024].

Achiume, E.T. (2022) Empire, borders, and refugee responsibility sharing. California Law Review, 110 (3), 1011-1040.

Bejarano A. (2011). Democracias precarias: Trayectorias políticas divergentes en Colombia y Venezuela (Precarious democracies: Divergent political paths in Colombia and Venezuela). Bogotá, D. C., Colombia: Universidad de los Andes, Colombia. Retrieved September 4, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7440/j.ctt18crz6b

Harley, T. and Wazefadost, N. (2023) Guidelines for Co-Produced Research with Refugees and Other People with Lived Experience of Displacement. UNSW.

Müller-Funk, L. (2021) Research with refugees in fragile political contexts: How ethical reflections impact methodological choices. Journal of Refugee Studies, 34 (2), 2308–2332.https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/feaa013.

Roht-Arriaza, N. and Martínez, S. (2019) Grand corruption and the international criminal court in the Venezuela situation. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 17 (5), 1057–1082.

 

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the Authors:

Fernando Garlin

Fernando Garlin is a PhD candidate at Université Paris Cité (CEPED, IRD, INSERM). His research intersects border studies, violence, and migration. Using ethnographic methods, he seeks to understand hate narratives within the governance regimes where they emerge. His publications focus on the political and aesthetic forms that alternative or marginalized groups adopt during sanitary and political crises.

Juliana Poveda

Juliana Poveda is a PhD student in the Law Department at Ulster University. Her research project addresses the linkages between reparative justice, responsibility-sharing, and durable solutions, addressing the case of Venezuelans forced to migrate to Colombia, the United States and Spain (EU). She is interested in sociolegal and interdisciplinary research that engages forced migration, human rights protection, and peacebuilding.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

Sexual and Gender-Based Violence: looking beyond physical crimes

By Posted on 2558 views
November 25 is the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, and to mark the day this blog has been written by Carolien Jacobs (Leiden University) Patrick Milabyo Kyamugusulwa (ISDR-Bukavu), and Rachel Sifa Katembera, all three members of the Humanitarian Observatory DRC. The authors argue throughout that it is important that we realise that sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) consists of more than only sexual violence, it also includes structural violence that regulates justice. This is also the case in conflict-settings such as the east of the DRC, where a lot of attention goes to sexual violence.
Photo by Authors
In a time in which ‘her body, my choice’ is quickly – and sadly – gaining traction on social media, it is important that we are aware of the range of crimes that sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) consists of: it is more than physical sexual violence. For many years, sexual violence in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo has gained a lot of attention from media, international donors, and academics, especially when committed by armed groups. In 2018, the renowned gynecologist Dr. Denis Mukwege was awarded the Noble Peace Prize for his ‘efforts to end the use of sexual violence as  a weapon of war and armed conflict’. Although we by no means want to deny or downplay the high prevalence of sexual violence in the DRC – as also shown by ISS colleague Bilge Sahin -, we would like to use this blog to raise attention to other forms of structural violence in many countries across our patriarchically dominant world. These forms of gender-based violence are deeply embedded in society’s structures, making it difficult for women (and minorities) to claim their rights and to find justice. In an earlier blog in this series, Patrick Milabyo and Delu Lusambya already pointed out the importance of rethinking norms of masculinity and of combating toxic masculinity. In this blog we draw attention to two prevalent forms of violence that disproportionately affect women in eastern DR Congo, namely violence related to inheritance disputes, and to witchcraft accusations. What is problematic about this? Which challenges do women face when they seek (state or non-state) justice in such situations? And what can be done about this? Inheritance rights: discrepancy between state law and customary law According to the Congolese Family Code, revised in 2016, women are entitled to a similar share of their parents’ properties after death. Yet, in most parts of the country, custom holds that only the male heirs are entitled to inherit, and daughters often remain empty-handed, this also applies to children born out of wedlock, if they have been recognized by the deceased in life. As such, all children are the first category of heirs (art. 758.1). A similar problem arises for the right to inheritance for spouses, a problem that is even more complicated in polygamous marriages and in marriages that are concluded only on a religious or customary basis. This means that in case of the death of a husband, the husband’s family often claims the property, with the wife losing out, even though the surviving partner, parents and brothers and sisters of the deceased are all heirs in the second category according to the DRC Family Code (art 758.2). If there is no formal wedding registration, women depend on customary authorities to apply the statutory Family Code, but these authorities often adhere more strongly to customary norms that prescribe the return of the couple’s property to her in-laws. In practice, we see efforts of civil society actors to raise awareness about the Family Code and the right of women to inherit both as spouses, and as daughters. Yet, it remains common for families to divide property only among males, with daughters and spouses often losing out. Witchcraft accusations Across Africa, states have difficulties in findings ways to deal with witchcraft and witchcraft accusations. This is not any different in the DRC, where the state does not recognize the existence of witchcraft, nor the threats of witchcraft (Dunn 2024). Accusations of witchcraft are most often geared towards women, especially elderly women. Witchcraft accusations are indicators of tensions and distrust in social relations. Even if such accusations lack material evidence, they are difficult to counterclaim for the person accused. Local (state and non-state) authorities often lack the power to deal with such accusations and to calm tensions, and victims of (false) accusations cannot resort to a legal framework to address such accusations. As a measure of protection, we find that accused women sometimes get expelled from their communities, or are even placed in detention to protect them from ‘popular justice’. The ‘remedies’ that are offered by police and other state services hence harm their rights even further and risk turning accused women into double victims. Seeking justice for gender-based violence in all its forms Women in eastern DRC are disproportionately affected by injustices related to inheritance disputes and witchcraft accusations. For the former type of injustices, a proper legal framework exists, but its enforcement is at odds with everyday practice in many places, even when legal awareness about women’s inheritance rights exists. Witchcraft accusations are more difficult to address within the legal-rational frameworks of state justice, but the current solutions that are sought by authorities are doing even further harm. In sum, we argue that even if state institutions of justice are accessible, societal factors may still hinder the recognition of women’s rights and continue gender-based violence. Raising legal awareness and promoting a change of culture are both need to overcome clashes between human rights and cultural practices that are at a disadvantage of women. Although we have focused here on the DRC, examples of gender-based violence are to be found across the world. Let us not be silent about this and recognize that SGBV is not limited to SV! Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the Authors:

Carolien Jacobs
Carolien Jacobs is assistant professor at Leiden University, and conducts research in collaboration with the Social Science Centre for African Development-KUTAFITI.
Patrick Milabyo Kyamusugulwa
Patrick Milabyo Kyamusugulwa is Professor at the Institut Supérieur des Techniques Médicales de Bukavu, in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). He is member of the DRC Humanitarian Observatory and member of the Social Science Centre for African Development-KUTAFITI.
Rachel Sifa Katembera
Rachel Sifa Katembera is a researcher of the Social Science Centre for African Development-KUTAFITI and a member of the DRC Humanitarian Observatory. This blog is based on empirical research conducted by the authors on access to justice in eastern DRC as part of the Just Future Alliance.   Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

This blog is part of the  Humanitarian Governance: Accountability, Advocacy, Alternatives’ project. This project has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 884139

IHSA Annual Lecture Reflection: Starvation crimes, network shutdowns, and obstacles to humanitarian action in Gaza and Sudan

By Posted on 2307 views
Image by Unsplash

In this blog, IHSA Vice-President and Senior Research Fellow at the Food Studies Centre at SOAS (University of London) Susanne Jaspars summarises and expands upon a contribution to the roundtable that followed the inaugural IHSA Annual Lecture on “War and Humanity” held in Bergen in May 2024. The blog was prepared with the help of Tamer Abd Elkreem and information gathered from their research project on the effects of digitalising food assistance.   

Starvation as a crime against humanity 

For about a year now, there’s been talk about imminent famine- and now famine – in Gaza and parts of Sudan, with very little action. In this blog post, I discuss starvation as a war crime and crime against humanity, what can be done in practice to act on starvation crimes, and why blocking communications networks needs to be seen as such a crime.   

War causes famine through acts that undermine the means of survival of particular population groups. This includes acts of commission such as attacks on production, markets, restriction of access for humanitarian actors, and the obstruction of relief. Also acts of omission such as failures to act in response to warnings or signs of famine, and acts of provision: the selective provision of food to one side of the conflict. These tactics can be part of counter-insurgency operations but also yield benefits for some. For example from being able to sell food at high prices and buy livestock at low cost, or use cheap labour from displaced populations.      

Extreme famines are therefore the result of political acts or decisions (local, national, international), meaning we need to understand: Who committed the famine? How was it committed and why? Who were the victims? Who was involved? In contrast to famine, a crime is not ended, but criminals are deterred, detained, prosecuted.   

Legal frameworks such as International Humanitarian law (IHL) and International Criminal Law (ICL), specify starvation as a crime:  ‘It is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population […] for the specific purpose of denying them for their sustenance … whether in order to starve out civilians, to cause them to move away, or for any other motive’. The crime of starvation includes wilfully obstructing humanitarian aid. The term “objects indispensable to survival” includes more than food, encompassing water installations and supplies, irrigation works, medicine, clothing, shelter, fuel, and electricity. There is no pre-defined list as items indispensable to survival are evolving and context dependant.   

Also, in 2018, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 2417 which condemns the use of starvation as a method of warfare against civilians and emphasised that it may constitute a war crime. I would like to discuss this a little further, in particular: 

How does reporting and accountability for starvation crimes work in practice? 

The Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) and the World Food Programme (WFP) report twice yearly to the UN Security Council (UNSC) on Resolution 2417.  The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) can also write closed White Papers to the UNSC and individual donors (like FCDO or the EU) too.  But how is this being operationalised?  What and how are FAO and WFP reporting?  What are some of the obstacles?   

Consider the February 2024 FAO/WFP report to the Security Council on Gaza and Sudan – which is remarkably apolitical.  The report states the facts on displacement, impact on food systems, and obstruction of humanitarian access, and then what is prohibited under IHL. However, these are mostly passive statements such as: 

  • ‘Unprecedented levels of conflict-induced displacement … have occurred.’  
  • ‘Civilian infrastructure has been damaged (water, fuel, electricity, bakeries, farms)’ 
  • ‘Conflict has halted production, prices have increased’ 
  • ‘Humanitarian aid has been restricted’ 
  • ‘Hostilities have led to telecoms blackouts’
     

War seems to almost be external to people’s economies or society, something neutral.  Using the passive tense to describe acts of war and its effects removes politics and responsibility.  This is exactly the opposite of what is needed to understand starvation crimes.    

What’s not in the report is who is causing starvation and who should be held to account (although there are some exceptions about Israeli actions in Gaza – e.g on the effect of evacuations without putting adequate infrastructure and services in place). Yet, Sudan has a long history of aid manipulation and since April 2023 there is evidence of the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) denying access to humanitarian aid, and of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) looting, destroying farms, and recruiting forces by threatening starvation. This presents an intensification of the long-standing extractive political economy, and involves regional and international actors.  Note that exports of gold, and livestock are continuing and crude oil exports were higher in December 2023 than in the previous year.     

The recommendations are all clearly needed but bland: restore humanitarian access, pressure warring parties to adhere to IHL, have an independent investigation.  With UN organisations reporting, how could it be otherwise? A focus on starvation crimes was supposed to put the politics back into famine analysis. But can UN resolution 2417 do it?  Questions remain on who should be reporting starvation crimes (states? resistance movements? activists? students?) and who should act on it.   

The South Africa case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) sets an important precedent,  in particular the amendment to the provisional measures in March 2024: to take all necessary and effective measures – without delay – for the provision of humanitarian assistance, in response to reports of famine and starvation.   Since then the International Criminal Court (ICC) is seeking a warrant for the arrest of Israeli leaders, in another unprecedented move, for  war crimes of starvation.   Even with these high-level actions, the crimes continue.   

In contrast, on Sudan there is mostly inaction.  While starvation and genocide in Gaza is played out daily on our television screens, such reports on Sudan are rare.  Recent warnings of famine, and statements by UN experts, have had little impact except to pressure warring parties to come to power-sharing agreements rather than holding them to account. 

Communications networks as objects indispensable to survival 

Of course, much of the lack of action in response to Sudan’s crisis is due the prioritisation of geopolitics and economic interests over humanitarian response and – ultimately – stopping the war.  Sudan’s invisibility is also a result of blocking and manipulating communications networks and connectivity. Most societies are digitalised, meaning that people are increasingly dependent on connectivity for their day-to-day activities or – in the case of Sudan – their survival.  Connectivity becomes important in relation to starvation crimes because:

  • Blocking communications networks hides information on violations of human rights and humanitarian law.    
  • Internet shutdowns disrupt social networks, remittances, food systems.   
  • Third, network shutdowns also block aid provision, not because it hinders the coordination, information and security of aid organisations, but aid itself is increasingly digitalised: pre-paid debit cards, electronic vouchers, and mobile money. 

In Sudan, the Bankak App from the Bank of Khartoum has been a lifeline since  the start of the April 2023 war because it could be used to transfer of money to crisis-affected people and local organisations. From early February, however, the RSF disabled all internet providers.  Soon after, Starlink Satelites were introduced in RSF-held areas, which ordinary people pay to use for internet connection but which were brought in and managed by the RSF. As such, control over communications has become a way of denying services and resources to the enemy, life or death for ordinary citizens, as well as a new way of profiteering. It also illustrates the moral dilemmas of providing aid in conflict and the challenges of reporting on famine crimes.  This does not mean we stop calling out starvation crimes, but rather highlights the importance for humanitarians to analyse famine as a political scandal that requires global as well as local action.  

 

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

                         About the Author: 
                           Susanne Jaspars

Susanne Jaspars is a Senior Research Fellow at the SOAS Food Studies Centre. She has been researching the social and political dynamics of food security, livelihoods and forced migration in situations of conflict, famine and humanitarian crises for more than thirty years. Susanne’s geographical focus is has been mostly Horn of Africa, specifically Sudan and Somalia with shorter periods in the Middle East, where she has worked as practitioner and researcher. She is currently the PI of an ESRC funded project entitled: ‘Digitalising food assistance: Political economy, governance and food security effects across the Global North-South divide.’ More information about Dr. Jaspars can be found on the SOAS website. 

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

Disaster Risk Reduction doesn’t (always) need to be expensive: introducing Frugal DRR

By Posted on 2243 views
Photo credit : Pixabay

In this blog, to mark global Disaster Risk Reduction Day, Tom Ansell (HSC Coordinator) considers whether disaster risk reduction activities can be made less-resource intensive through Frugal Innovation. Whilst Frugal DRR shouldn’t be considered a money-saving replacement for development and infrastructure work, it does provide an opportunity for communities to reduce their vulnerability and increase their capacity for dealing with the consequences of hazards that could include extreme weather, geological hazards, or other environmental hazards.

What is DRR? And what’s wrong with the term ‘natural disasters’?

Disaster Risk Reduction, according to the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) is activities that are “aimed at preventing new and reducing existing disaster risk and managing residual risk, all of which contribute to strengthening resilience and therefore to the achievement of sustainable development.” So, in simple terms, activities that work to prevent and mitigate risks to reduce the effects of disasters. It’s important to note here that we use the term disaster in connection with hazards like earthquakes, floods and others while avoiding the ‘natural disaster’, as this ignores the social dimension of disasters.

People across the world live in places that have different levels of risk and have different vulnerabilities in the face of these risks. More than the hazard itself, a much larger defining factor for how much damage, social upheaval, and loss of life occurs is how vulnerable people are, and how prepared they are for when a potential hazard becomes a disaster. In other words, an earthquake of magnitude 8 will have significantly different effects in a wealthy country with a strong governance system, to a much poorer country with (for example) a fragmented government. In the words of Margaret Arnold at the World Bank, “the key lesson is that disasters are social constructs. People are vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and natural hazards due not just to their geographical context, but their financial, their social status, their cultural status, their gender status, their access to services, their level of poverty, their access to decision making, and their access to justice.”

For example, Tokyo often suffers from extreme stormy weather: as many countries with a Pacific coast do. The city of Tokyo, however, also has one of the largest storm drains in the world to help divert water resulting from storms or extremely heavy rainfall. The project, completed in the 1990s and costing around 3 billion US Dollars, means that though the city is often affected by tropical cyclones and typhoons, there is typically much less loss of life in the Tokyo area than others affected by the same typhoon – especially as the city of Tokyo has well-developed evacuation routes, early warning and information systems, and more besides.

This example serves to demonstrate the purpose of DRR activities: to prevent risks and – where this is not possible – to minimize the overall damage caused by extreme weather. As the ‘no natural disasters’ movement emphasizes, reacting after the event is a less intelligent way to respond to disasters, compared to prevention, pre-preparation, and planning is a much more productive and intelligent way to ‘respond’ to disasters. Various frameworks for ‘good’ risk management activities have been devised, including the Hyogo Framework (2005-2015) and Sendai Framework (2015-2030).

Are DRR activities always expensive?

In the example above, of the city of Tokyo, a major contributing factor to mitigating climate risks for the city involved constructing a large piece of public infrastructure. Similar projects have taken place around the world, for example the Delta Works in the Netherlands , the Thames Barrier in the UK, or the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway West Closure Complex in New Orleans in the USA. These three examples are all related to storm surges, flooding, or other water-related hazards. But (expensive) risk-reducing infrastructure also exists to mitigate the effects of rockfall (for example in Interlaken in Switzerland), avalanches (for example the Gazex system), or to stabilize land vulnerable to landslides through enormous retaining walls (for example in West Bengal, India).

At this point, it might seem that all DRR activities are exceptionally expensive, very large public infrastructure that are only available to the very wealthiest regions in the world. But that would be a serious oversimplification of what smaller groups of citizens, with or without the support of institutions, can achieve to mitigate risk and so reduce their vulnerability. DRR activities also include mapping areas that will be most affected by an extreme event, creating evacuation routes, developing information systems and early-warning systems, training citizens on flood-proofing their homes, or even making informational videos on what to do should a disaster strike.

This is not to say that large infrastructure projects aren’t important: indeed they can be transformational. However, it is important to emphasize that DRR activities are not always expensive: even though an all-round DRR plan for a place will likely include both more expensive infrastructure, less economically-expensive activities can also make a difference.

Can ‘Frugal Innovation’ inspire low-cost but effective interventions?

In order to develop new ideas around lower-cost (frugal) risk reduction activities, it is useful to dive into the world of Frugal Innovation. The International Centre for Frugal Innovation (ICFI), based at ISS and part of LDE, considers the practice and approach to be a potentially transformative way of finding new solutions to growing societal problems, in a non-excessive way. Andre Leliveld and Peter Knorringa, in an article from 2017 setting out the potential relationship between Frugal Innovation and development, note that the field sprouted from multiple sources but takes much inspiration from jugaad practices in South Asia. Jugaad is an excellent catch-all term (borrowed from Hindi, and with similar terms in Punjabi, Urdu, and various Dravidian languages including Telugu and Malyalam) for low-cost and often ingenious solutions to nagging problems; as well as the kind of mindset that allows the creative thinking around these solutions to occur. Whilst the term and thinking is often used in business (to create products for people with less purchasing power), it is very versatile.

Utilising some of the thinking inherent within Frugal Innovation in relation to DRR activities requires taking a solutions-oriented approach, and making use of existing resources, skills, or initiatives to reduce vulnerability by mitigating risk.

Painting and planning: Frugal Disaster Risk Reduction in action

How urban communities adapt to heatwaves across India is an interesting way to demonstrate how integrating Frugal Innovation techniques into Disaster Risk Reduction carries the potential for meaningful reduction in vulnerability.

Heatwaves have the potential to be very destructive, and one solution that is being rolled out across several areas that have a high number of informal dwellings in cities including Mumbai and Nagpur is the low-cost but high-yield technique of painting roofs white (to reflect the sun) and installing secondary ‘shade roofs’ on buildings. This can reduce inside temperatures by several degrees on the hottest of days. Similarly, a network of inexpensive recording devices has been installed to track ‘hotspots’ in the city, which can inform where communal ‘cooling zones’ need to be set up local city corporations or voluntary groups. And, in Ahmedabad in the north-west of India, a ‘Heat Action Plan’ was developed by the city corporation and scientific partners that is estimated to have prevented hundreds of fatalities.

Developing evacuation routes, making sure that citizens are prepared for what to do in a disaster, small and uncomplicated changes to people’s homes, or even utilising close-knit communities and communication networks as informal warning systems may not structurally reduce peoples’yet vulnerabilities yet can make a difference in preventing the worst of disaster impacts. And, whilst not as transformational as large public infrastructure projects, any gain in a communities’ resilience is an important step. Luckily ‘Frugal Innovation’ techniques show us that DRR doesn’t always need to be expensive.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author

Tom Ansell

Tom Ansell is the Coordinator of the Humanitarian Studies Centre and International Humanitarian Studies Association.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Questions of Sovereignty -Somalia on the UN Security Council

By Posted on 2850 views
Photo Credit: Evan Schneider

In this blog, Ahmed Sh. Ibrahim and Nisar Majid consider how Somalia’s joining of the UN Security Council at a time when its nationally recognised government controls only a portion of its territory. With Somalia’s internal territory so fractured, the authors look at a growing gap between how the ‘international community’ treats the Somali state and how the Somali state interacts with its internal polities and citizens. This all has serious knock-on effects for our understanding of the term “sovereignty”.

On 6 June 2024 Somalia won a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council, along with Denmark, Greece, Pakistan and Panama. As East Africa’s representative, Somalia along with the other newly elected members will join five already existing members to create the 10 non-permanent members on the Security Council. They will join the Security Council’s five permanent veto-wielding members of Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States. This two-year position, commencing in 2025, gives Somalia a voice in how the UN responds to conflicts around the world. Reacting to this development, the Foreign Minister of Somalia stated that Somalia would take up “its position on the global stage” and that “We stand ready to play a vital role in promoting peace and security in the world,” while the UN secretary general’s special representative for Somalia claimed “Somalia has come a long way over the past three decades on its path to peace, prosperity and security.”

Somalia, though, is a country that has minimal control over its territorial boundaries; with the secessionist region of Somaliland in control of the northeast of the country, various regional administrations with limited allegiance to federal authorities in central and southern regions and the militant Islamist group al-Shabaab holding arguably more territory than the government to the south. In this blog, we discuss Somalia’s election to the UN Security Council in relation to the juridico-political concept of sovereignty. We contend that Somalia’s election to the UN Security Council reveals one of the central problems with the concept of sovereignty: the disparity between a state’s internal sovereignty – a state’s ability to exercise effective control over its territory – and external sovereignty, also known as juridical sovereignty – the recognition by other states of a state’s rights to exercise control over its territory. We assert that there appears to be an increasing gap between Somalia’s ability to exercise sovereignty within its own territory and therein over its own people and its investment in external sovereignty or rather the investment of the international community in Somalia’s external sovereignty.

Sovereignty in Africa – a colonial inheritance

One of the most important concepts in contemporary political thought and practice is the juridico-political doctrine of sovereignty. The long and complicated history of this concept can be traced to the early history of state formation in Europe when it functioned as an organizing concept in debates over political authority

Since the emergence of the nation-state in Europe and its subsequent spread to the rest of the world, sovereignty has become synonymous with state authority and prerogative. As such, the specific history of this concept in African political history is deeply intertwined with the rise of the colonial state in the era of colonization. Ironically, the doctrine of sovereignty was initially part of the legitimating discourse used to justify European colonization of non-European peoples, including Africans. It was claimed that the attainment of a certain level of cultural and civilizational status was necessary in order for a particular society to legitimately claim sovereignty. Africans, as well as other colonized peoples, were too backward to exercise sovereignty over themselves, it was argued, and must be governed.  

While Africans and other colonized peoples rightly celebrated the attainment of sovereignty at independence, the historical legacy of colonialism was made evident when postcolonial sovereignty was bestowed on the successor of the colonial state, the postcolonial state. In Africa, this meant that the political borders drawn by colonizing European states were to crystalise into the parameters of postcolonial juridico-political sovereignty.

Despite arguments by some African scholars that the form of sovereignty inherited from colonialism is incompatible with African political history, the Organization of African Unity (OAU) and its successor, the African Union (AU), have maintained that respect for colonial borders is a practical necessity to avoid chaos and balkanization of the continent into countless ethnic enclaves. But as the postcolonial state in Africa has come under increasing economic and political crisis, so has the contestation over sovereignty become a contemporary reality in Africa. 

No region in Africa is this more evident than in the Horn, considered one of the most conflict-prone regions on the continent. A significant contributor to the region’s conflicts are contestations over sovereignty. There have been several wars in the region over the question of sovereignty, including the 1977-78 war between Ethiopia and Somalia, as well as the 1961-1992 war that led to Eritrea’s separation from Ethiopia.

The recent and highly controversial MoU between Ethiopia and Somaliland, signed on 1 January 2024, is only the latest expression of one of the fault lines of conflict in the region.  The agreement gives Ethiopia access to and the right to build on land on the Somaliland coast: land that the Somali government considers to be its own sovereign territory. The disputes over sovereignty in the Horn is further exasperated by the complete disintegration of the postcolonial Somali state in 1991.

Photo Credit: Evan Schneider

Somaliland – internal sovereignty, external exclusion

The origin of the dispute over Somaliland’s sovereignty lies in the fallout from the breakdown of the Somali Republic. After about a decade of armed rebellion by several rebel groups, the longtime military regime of Mohamed Siyad Barre fell in 1991. Subsequent to the regime’s fall, the different rebel forces failed to agree upon the formation of a new government. This failure threw the country into a prolonged period of civil war creating the longest running and the paradigmatic example of a ‘failed state’ in the contemporary world. Reflecting the socio-cultural structure of Somali society and the machinations of rebel leaders, the various rebel movements were organized on the basis of clan and regional identity. This meant that when the military regime fell in 1991, each rebel group took control of the region where their specific clan predominated. The north-eastern part of the country was taken over by the Somali National Movement (SNM), whose members were primarily from the Issaq clan. Subsequent to their takeover of the region, SNM and traditional leaders from the region (Issaq and non-Issaq) decided to unilaterally secede from Somalia in 1991.  

In keeping with the dominant understanding of sovereignty in postcolonial Africa, regional authorities in Somaliland grounded their right to secede on sovereign authority inherited from the colonial state. Their argument is based on the fact that the region was a distinct colonial entity from the rest of Somalia. It was under British colonial administration from 1884-1960 and known as British Somaliland, or officially, the Somaliland Protectorate, while the rest of Somalia was colonized by Italy, Italian Somaliland. Five days after becoming independent on June 26, 1960, British Somaliland merged with Italian Somaliland to form the postcolonial state of Somalia.  Separatist officials from Somaliland argue that they are separating from Somalia and reclaiming the sovereign statehood, which was lost when the region voluntarily united with Italian Somaliland. This argument is made with an eye to the AU’s position that the political borders inherited upon independence should be the basis of African sovereignty and statehood.

Subsequent to its unilateral declaration of independence, Somaliland has created a relatively effective governance structure combining indigenous and modern forms of governance mechanisms. Consequently, and for the most part, Somaliland exercises a certain level of internal sovereignty, especially when compared with the rest of Somalia, where there has not been an effective internal authority since the fall of the state in 1991. Even Somaliland’s internal sovereignty and legitimacy was always more contested than claimed and has arguably weakened in recent years, including most evidently in the form of the Las Anod conflict. Despite its arguments and relative stability, however, no state has recognized Somaliland’s claim to sovereign statehood, That said, Somaliland does maintain quasi-official diplomatic relations with some countries (Ethiopia) as well as other contested/semi-recognised polities (Taiwan).

Somalia – limited internal sovereignty, external recognition

Somalia’s internal sovereignty is limited both by the secessionist Somaliland (as indicated above), but also by highly autonomous regional states, such as Puntland, whose formation precedes that of the Federal Government of Somalia, as well as by the persistence of al-Shabaab, whose own lifespan is longer than the Federal government, and which opposes the current Somali state.

Following the collapse of the state in 1990/91 and various periods of conflict and a succession of internationally supported peace processes, Somalia’s current federal government was established in 2013. It is very much the product of external intervention and a response to the perceived Islamist threat in a post-9/11 world, vividly described by Ken Menkhaus as’ ‘principally a division of spoils that is held together by a combination of a common threat posed by Al-Shabaab, copious levels of security driven external aid, and protection afforded by AMISOM peacekeepers.’

Since the establishment of this governmental arrangement Somalia is now in its third Presidential election cycle. As a sovereign entity it largely operates as a series of city states, divided between the Federal Government based in Mogadishu, operating out of a bunkerised ‘green zone’ and the Federal Member States, each with its own limitations on territorial control and legitimacy. Al-Shabaab holds sway over large swathes of the rural hinterland as well as possessing  a strong extra-territorial power, is able to tax business and people in government-held territory and operates a sharia’a based judicial system that many people utilise as it is considered both relatively fair/just and has the coercive capacity that ensures judgements are implemented.

Aisha Ahmad et al. argue that in fact there are two key parallel political bargains in Somalia, an elite political deal or bargain between members of the Federal Government and Federal Member States and a civilian deal which al-Shabaab establishes with citizens under its influence. The former deal is essentially backed up by the international community in the name of state sovereignty, and which serves to undermine the incentive for the government to develop a social compact with much of its population.

For many Somalis as well as many in the international community who work in and on Somalia, there is increasing recognition that domestic governance or internal sovereignty is not progressing even as the federal authorities in Mogadishu are increasingly invested by the international community with more powers of external/juridical sovereignty.

Conclusions

Somalia’s acceptance on the UN Security Council continues this external legitimising dynamic – and external sovereignty – with  limited signs on the ground that government – whether at the national, regional or local levels – is acting to improve its legitimacy with local populations, or that negotiations are taking place with either Somaliland or al-Shabaab, to further develop its internal sovereignty. It is in fact possible to argue that the continued legitimization of the Somali government by the international community in the name of sovereignty disincentivises government authorities from acting to consolidate internal sovereignty by investing in effective governance structures, improving its legitimacy with the local population through service provisioning and negotiating with the various competing authorities throughout the country. While reconciling the Westphalian notion of sovereignty with the complicated realities of African states struggling to exert internal and external sovereignty has always been difficult, the situation in Somalia underscores not only this country’s struggle with sovereignty, but the potential for contradictions between the external trappings of sovereignty and the internal reality.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the Authors:

Dr. Ahmed Sh. Ibrahim

Dr. Ahmed Sh. Ibrahim is a socio-cultural anthropologist with a PhD from the Graduate Center, City University of New York (CUNY). He is currently an anthropology instructor with Carleton College’s Ecology and Anthropology Program in Tanzania. Dr. Ibrahim has done research in the Horn of Africa and among the African diaspora in the U.S. with a focus on the history and politics of religion, political conflicts and immigration. His research has appeared in peer-reviewed academic journals, edited volumes, and popular websites such as Africa is a Country and Responsible Statecraft. He can be reached at ahmedf95@gmail.com.

Dr. Nisar Majid

Dr. Nisar Majid is the research director for the PeaceRep (Somalia) programme at the LSE. He has worked in and on the Horn of Africa and the Somali territories for over 20 years, in various applied and research capacities. His areas of research have included food security and famine studies, humanitarianism, and diaspora studies. He is the co-author of ‘Famine in Somalia, Competing Imperatives, Collective Failures’, 2011-12 (Hurst). He can be reached at N.Majid1@lse.ac.uk.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

Why is it important to start a cycling culture with small children?

By Posted on 2655 views
Photo Credit: Amanda Padilla, 2022

A cycling culture should start with kids, allowing them to improve their health, social interaction and learning process. However, Latin American cities have some barriers linked to insecure cycling infrastructure, road safety and weak cycling habits. In this blog article, Amanda Padilla discusses how a cycling activity focused on small infants integrally addresses their well-being and harvests long-term positive impacts on society, the environment and mobility.

Significant issues have been affecting children from early childhood, such as passive habits, reduced social interaction and poor health conditions with obesity being a serious global health problem. In 2022, obesity affected one in eight people worldwide, impacting 3 million children under five years old in South America. In Ecuador, a study shows that 36% of children between five to eleven years old are obese or overweight. Likewise, this problem escalates in young people and adults, leading to inactive and solitary lifestyles that impede social, mental and physical development.

In the context of child health, cycling not only addresses obesity, enhances social interaction and strengthens physical skills, but also positively impacts urban environments by decreasing air pollution and bridging socio-economic gaps. However, developing countries lack a robust urban cycling culture and school cycling programmes for children.

In 2022, only 0,6% of the population of Quito uses cycling as a mode of transportation. Inadequate and insecure cycling lanes, a weak cycling culture and a car-oriented lifestyle hinder the shift towards sustainable transportation. Despite local and national laws prioritizing active mobility and the efforts of activists and cycling organizations, a new cycling vision with strong and integrated cycle programmes will lead to a deep-routed cycling culture and policies.

Despite these challenges, promising practices are addressing these issues and contributing to urban solutions. In 2019, I learned about child-friendly cycling activities in Copenhagen and Quito, coordinating the project of the Cycling Games at the INEPE school from 2019 to 2024, an activity based on the Danish ‘Learning by playing’ methodology. This experience has underscored the importance of starting with young children to cultivate a cycling culture. The benefits observed from this activity include:

1. Long-term impact

In Quito, children and caregivers rarely cycle, reflecting a modest cycling habit. Introducing cycling to young children can help establish it as a lifelong habit. An activity that begins in early childhood will persist throughout the kid’s life and early childhood cycling experiences prepare children for urban cycling dynamics, promoting safety and confidence. Learning cycling skills can help them navigate and better cope with insecure cycle infrastructure in Quito.

2. Spreading the Cycling Practice

When children enjoy an activity, their parents often follow suit. In fact, ’cycling creates connections at many different levels and the value that young children and caregivers derive from these connections‘. When children start cycling, their fascination often motivates caregivers to participate and encourages them to spend time with their children. Thus, this culture is increasing and a deep-routed cycling culture can be achieved.

Photo Credit: Amanda Padilla, 2023

3. Development of social and physical skills through Cycling Games. 

Cycling activities emphasize the development of various capacities and balance through play. This approach implemented both in Copenhagen and Quito, encourages active routines that foster the development of social and physical skills, tackling obesity and passive habits. The results are evident as children apply these skills in other areas of their lives. In Quito, for example, children are required to complete certain assignments before they can go out and play. This practice helps them establish a routine that cultivates a sense of responsibility and goal-oriented behavior. In Copenhagen, the frequent use of public spaces allows children to navigate through obstacles and urban furniture, which not only enhances their understanding of street dynamics but also strengthens their physical abilities. Public spaces are key elements on the child growth. Sporadically, in Quito, the activity is developed in streets, creating new relationships between the city and children, yet Quito doesn’t guarantee road safety and secure cycling infrastructure to expand it frequently.

4. Teachers develop new ways to educate

Training children in diverse contexts and cultures presents unique challenges, yet the educational benefits gleaned from activities like the Cycling Games are universally significant. Educators have adapted and enhanced their teaching methods based on these activities, demonstrating remarkable flexibility and creativity to meet the varying needs of their students. Each group of students presents different dynamics and requirements, necessitating a tailored approach to teaching. For instance, teachers at Hylet Kindergarten in Copenhagen have devised new games that require children to memorize elements with different colours, shapes and routes to prove skills simultaneously. In Quito, trainers have developed cycling games that minimize physical contact or develop soft games, specifically to accommodate and protect children with physical or mental disabilities.

5. Interaction contributes to socialization

The Cycling Games significantly contribute to the development of socialization skills. By promoting group play, mutual support and peer learning, the games create an environment where children can interact and build relationships with their classmates. This interaction fosters respect and teamwork, qualities that extend beyond the cycling activities into other areas of their lives, including interactions with family and schoolmates.

Photo Credit Amanda Padilla, 2023

Broad Impact of the Cycling Games in Quito: ‘Please, bus driver, stop at the yellow light’

The Cycling Games in Quito have significantly influenced the community, particularly through their educational impact on road safety. Children of the Cycling Games project at the INEPE school, for example, teach adults important safety measures like stopping at yellow lights, demonstrating the programme’s success in instilling these habits. Over several years, the Cycling Games have fostered a strong cycling culture, with students, caregivers, teachers and school authorities all recognizing the programme’s benefits such as improving health and promoting sustainable mobility.

 The Cycling Games is a key initiative in promoting mobility in Quito, fostering children’s development, health outcomes* and contributing to long-term changes in mobility. Data from 2021 shows a strong desire among children to cycle outside of school, indicating a positive shift towards incorporating cycling into daily routines. This enthusiasm suggests a broader impact on community behaviors and future city policies, promoting a more active and environmentally conscious urban lifestyle.

Photo Credit Amanda Padilla, 2023

New infant-care public policies are being developed in Quito, presenting a great opportunity to introduce children’s cycling projects to address significant issues such as obesity or passive habits, contribute to increasing sustainable mobility and enhance urban cycling lifestyles. Those powerful contributions will create a new city scenario with a secured cycle infrastructure, a robust cycling culture and a healthy community.

Bibliography:

Padilla, A. (01 de July de 2020). A seed in the Mobility of Quito. Quito, Ecuador.

World Health Organization. (01 de March de 2024). One in eight people are now living with obesity. https://www.who.int/news/item/01-03-2024-one-in-eight-people-are-now-living-with-obesit

United Nations Children’s Fund. (2023). 2023 Report. Childhood overweight on the rise. Is it too late to turn the tide in Latin America and the Caribbean? Panama City: UNICEF Latin America and the Caribbean Regional Office (LACRO).

The Bernard van Leer Foundation & BYCS. (2020). Cycling Cities for Infants, Toddlers, and Caregivers. Amsterdam.

(Tello, Ocaña, García-Zambrano, Enríque-Moreira, & Dueñas-Espín, 2023)

The Municipality of the Metropolitan District of Quito. (March de 2024). Plan Maestro de Movilidad para el Distrito Metropolitano de Quito 2009-2025. Quito, Ecuador.

C40 Cities. January 2021. Ciclovías en la capital. https://www.c40.org/case-studies/ciclovias-en-la-capital/

Pucher, J., & Buehler, R. (2012). City Cycling. Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Charlotte Basiliadis (Pedagog and educator at Kindergarten Hylet) in discussion with the author, May 16, 2024.

Guisella Pintag (Pedagog and educator at the INEPE school) in discussion with the author, April 30, 2024.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author

Amanda Padilla

Amanda Padilla is an architect who graduated from the Polytechnic University of Milan. She is into developing child-care projects, develops public policies and manages public space projects and urban plans at public departments. Amanda has collaborated with Urban Cycle Planning of Denmark, coordinating the Cycling Games project in Quito, supporting data collection of this activity in La Havana, and assisting the Bikeable City Masterclass in Copenhagen. She represents Quito in the Bicycle Major Network Programme of BYCS.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

“Happy cows without happy workers?” How Migrant Justice is fighting for improved labour conditions in the US’ dairy industry

By Posted on 3096 views

Dairy production often relies on poorly paid and precarious migrant labour, but while the welfare of animals in the dairy sector is increasingly emphasized, that of the people working in the sector receives less attention. In this blog article, Hammal Aslam and Karin Astrid Siegmann discuss the efforts of migrant dairy workers’ organization Migrant Justice to highlight the precarious labour conditions migrant dairy workers face and to push for the sector’s transformation. The organization’s approach combines the expansion of workers’ associational capacity and the forging of alliances with other actors — a successful strategy that can inspire other movements.

Migrant workers formed more than half of the total work force in the US’ dairy sector in 2014. According to the farmworker solidarity organization Farmworker Justice, “[…] if this work force were to disappear, US dairy production would decrease by 48.4 billion pounds while the cost of milk would increase by an estimated 90.4%.” This suggests that the low prices of dairy are subsidized by the workers of the sector, a result of their systematically suppressed human and labour rights. In practical terms, downward pressures on dairy prices translate into a range of exploitative arrangements including but not limited to long working hours, low wages, and frequent exposure to occupational hazards.

The development of more complex global and regional production networks in and beyond agri-business has raised pressing concerns about labour rights. Therefore, marshalling public support and fostering connections between various segments and actors in society seems to be a viable alternative for promoting social justice, given the erosion of power of labour unions caused by neoliberal processes. In this blog article, we talk about Migrant Justice, a Vermont-based migrant workers’ organization that is seeking to change the US’ dairy industry from the inside out.

Pursuing dignified working conditions

In Vermont, a state in the northeastern US in which dairy sales represent more than two thirds of agricultural sales, a coalition of dairy farm workers, labour activists, and consumers have encouragingly tackled some of these long-suppressed issues after the death of a young Mexican farmworker, Jose Obeth, in a preventable accident in 2009. Organized under the banner of Migrant Justice, Vermont’s migrant dairy workers — many of whom are undocumented — and their allies in civil society have been campaigning for migrant workers’ rights.

The Milk with Dignity program that Migrant Justice implemented in 2018 has sought to engender corporate responses that assume some responsibility for injustices and to guarantee decent labour conditions in the dairy chain. The programme incentivizes improved working conditions at the farm level through a premium paid by upstream buyers for milk produced under conditions that comply with an agreed labour standard monitored by workers and a third party, the Milk with Dignity Standards Council.

In a legal context hostile to workers in the agricultural sector and to migrant labour in particular, and in the absence of collective bargaining power, labour rights activists associated with Migrant Justice have adopted a multi-pronged approach to address abuses in the dairy value chain. They mobilize popular support from civil society to pressure commercial buyers of milk such as the supermarket chain Hannaford for more dignified labour conditions. This advocacy has led to the Milk with Dignity program’s institutionalized mechanisms for settling workers’ grievances.

The expansion of associational capacity for workers and the formation of coalitions with other actors have also catalysed the passing of progressive legislations. Especially the recent landmark passing of Vermont PRO Act not only widens workers’ collective action rights but also extends bargaining rights to domestic workers, a group of workers devoid of labour rights since 1940s. Previously, Migrant Justice also lobbied for the Education Equity for Immigrant Students bill, which now ensures that migrants have access to higher education regardless of their legal statuses.

By holding accountable corporate actors and positioning workers centrally in their programs, Migrant Justice’s approach goes a step ahead of typical consumer-focused conceptions of ethical consumption and corporate social responsibility.

Lobbying the big players

When a delegation of Migrant Justice arrived at the ISS for a conversation on “Lobbying Ahold for Milk with Dignity” this April, they had just returned from an action in Amsterdam. The delegation had travelled from the US at the occasion of the Annual General Meeting of Dutch–Belgian multinational Ahold Delhaize to highlight human rights violations in their dairy chain, where the executives of the company convened to celebrate € 88.65 billion in 2023 sales. Ahold Delhaize’s subsidiary, the Hannaford chain of supermarkets in the northeastern US, sources dairy from farms in Vermont, where workers originating from Mexico and Central America work in inhumane conditions.

Building a counterhegemonic current

A Migrant Justice delegate opened the conversation at the ISS with the remark that “[w]e might have happy cows, but without happy workers.” His remark showed that in the dairy industry, corporates actors often talk about happy cows, but that the working conditions of the labourers are rarely part of the agenda. The conversation was a lesson in how modern-day global value chains have evolved, how they lock in cheap and exploited labour and continue making enormous profit, and what creative and effective strategies are needed to defend human and labour rights in such conditions.

Celebrating successes

So far, Migrant Justice has celebrated several successes:

  1. The expansion of associational capacity for workers and the formation of coalitions with other actors, including civil societyactors, employers, and public representatives, has been one successful strategy in Vermont.
  2. While global ice-cream manufacturer Ben & Jerry’s is the only company who currently participates in the Milk with Dignity programme, this nevertheless means that one fifth of Vermont’s dairy industry is covered by the programme.
  3. Five years into the programme, over US$ 3 million has been invested in boosting workers’ wages and bonuses as well as in improvements to their labour and housing conditions.

Migrant Justice members showed us that improved outcomes for workers have been made possible by building a broad-based counterhegemonic current and articulating demands through both cooperation and contestation. Their experience is an encouraging example for innovative ways to achieve justice at work and making small, yet meaningful gains for workers and their families at the bottom of the ladder. They can prefigure significant change that places those currently constructed as social, political, and economic ‘nobodies’ at the centre of an alternative vision of agri-food chains.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

Authors:

Hammal Aslam

Hammal Aslam is a PhD researcher at ISS. In his doctoral work he is focusing on rural transformations in Balochistan, Pakistan. Previously, he worked as a university lecturer and was actively involved with organizations that advocate for the rights of Afghan refugees in Pakistan.

Karin Astrid Siegmann is an Associate Professor in Labour and Gender Economics at ISS. In her research, she seeks to understand how precarious workers challenge and change the social, economic and political structures that marginalize labour.

Karin Astrid Siegmann

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

What can the frugal innovation debate learn from the Norm Life Cycle debate?

By Posted on 2774 views

There is a strong case for making innovations more frugal. The world needs innovations which are sparing in the use of resources and affordable by poor people. They matter especially in poor countries but also for people in rich countries, as frugal innovations can help us to push towards a more sustainable future. Frugal innovations are therefore relevant for most of the world’s population. The problem is that frugal innovation so far remains a fringe phenomenon.  The question addressed in this blog is how frugal innovation can become the norm rather than remain the exception.

Norm Life Cycle Illustration

To address this question, we draw on the Norm Life Cycle framework because it helps us to unpack the time dimension. It creates the mental space for detecting insights into process and sequence. This blog shows how the Norm Life Cycle framework helps to understand how idealistic and committed actors – going against the tide – can bring a new norm towards a tipping point. Once it reaches this tipping point, it starts to become the new normal. Then also those who earlier dismissed this new norm will start to adhere to the new norm, even if with fits and starts. A final stage is when such a new norm becomes internalised in a society through policy and law making.

Norm life cycle based on Illustration in Savarimuthu and Cranefield(2019)

In what follows we present the Norm Life Cycle framework in more detail and then indicate how it can move us forward.

Three stages 

The framework was developed by Martha Finnemore and Kathryn Sikkink in their article International norm dynamics and political change. It investigates how the norms for what is acceptable behaviour in a society change over time. Its key propositions are as follows. In the first stage of norm emergence, altruism, empathy, idealism and commitment are seen as the main motives for so called ‘norm entrepreneurs’ to push for a new norm. This new norm goes against the tide of ‘how things have always been done’ and is initially dismissed by mainstream stakeholders as going against common sense and the interests of the elites, being impractical, going to drive up costs, etc. An often-used example is the abolition of child labour. While child labour was once considered a normal and convenient practice in many societies in earlier centuries, at some point ‘enlightened’ activists began to rally against child labour. In the early stages these activists fought an uphill battle, and it took them lots of effort and perseverance to get the upper hand and reach what in the Norm Life Cycle framework is called the tipping point when such a new norm becomes mainstreamed.

This is called the second stage of norm cascading where it becomes ‘the right thing to do’ for more mainstream stakeholders beyond the idealistic norm entrepreneurs. Even less convinced stakeholders may start claiming they adopt the new norm in order to minimize the risk of being considered a laggard or ‘out of touch with the new reality’. Effectively, the societal license to operate has tipped and a new norm has become established. Another typical dimension of an established new norm is that it becomes difficult to imagine that such a norm did not exist before, like in the case of the broad conviction that child labour should never have been allowed.

The third and final stage is norm internalization. This is when the new norm becomes consolidated in policy and law making as it is considered to represent a generally accepted minimal level of legitimate behaviour. Here it is important to note that this implies that policy and law makers tend to follow norm setting in society instead of spearheading the establishment of new norms.

The key actors 

What does this imply for the frugal innovation debate? In order to show how this framework helps us with mainstreaming frugal innovation thinking, we need to populate these stages with actors. We distinguish between two types of actors. Those who develop frugal innovations and those who facilitate the process.

Amongst those who actually develop frugal innovations, we can identify three types of norm entrepreneurs. The first group consists of people trying to creatively solve a bottleneck in their own community. They are not primarily motivated by the prospects of subsequently making a business based on their innovation. They recognise a problem and see a technical or organizational solution, which is affordable and saves energy or other resources. The second category are social entrepreneurs and NGOs who develop frugal innovations – sometimes with local stakeholders – to help address a Sustainable Development Goal, like access to electricity through a solar-panel driven local mini-grid. These two types of norm entrepreneurs embrace frugal innovation thinking as a way to tackle developmental challenges. The third type of entrepreneurs develop frugal innovations to enhance their competitiveness and profits. They may do this through, for example, simplifying and stripping products, services and systems from superfluous frills, using fewer and possibly more renewable resources.

Next to those actors who actually develop frugal innovations, we identify four types of facilitators. These are researchers, educators, early adopters and policy makers.  Let us start with the researchers. An increasingly multi-disciplinary academic debate is emerging among researchers about the importance and relevance of frugal innovation. A recent example is a multi-disciplinary Handbook on Frugal Innovation, published by Edward Elgar. Educators further spread the message further, for instance business schools which offer case studies of frugal innovation in their courses for future executives. Another example is the popular module on Frugal Innovation for Sustainable Global Development offered to bachelor students from Leiden-Delft-Erasmus Universities in the Netherlands. This module presents frugal innovation as a crucial component in broader sustainability thinking for the next generation.

The third category of facilitators are so-called early adopters, a term that comes from marketing science. They make frugal innovations fashionable, demonstrating a lifestyle that others can then aspire to. Typically, they are younger people with high levels of income and education, for whom greener and more frugal consumption patterns are already a more established norm. A final facilitating actor are law and policy makers. In the basic Norm Life Cycle framework, they come to prominence only in the final stage of internalisation, where they further consolidate a new norm in the law and in policies. In principle, however, they can also play a role earlier in the process, as discussed in the next section.

Moving forward 

What stage are we currently in? De facto we are in the norm emergence stage. However, advertising creates the illusion that we are already in the norm cascading stage. ‘Responsible resource use’ may be ubiquitous in advertising but not yet in reality. In this concluding section we indicate how the various actors can help the progression from norm emergence to norm cascading.

In the present norm emergence stage, norm entrepreneurs that actually develop and implement frugal innovations are crucial to show how such innovations benefit poorer people while being sparing in the use of resources. The facilitating actors are also crucial as their role is to showcase these examples and create the conditions for the broader public and policy makers to grasp the importance of frugal innovations. The research community, one of the facilitating actors, showed recently an encouraging sign of getting closer to the tipping point towards norm cascading. In its December 2023 editorial, the journal Nature apologizes for neglecting frugal innovation research and encourages policy makers, scientists and journal editors to ‘not just to make do, but to make amends’ and make frugal innovation a mainstream concern. (Nature, Vol 624, 7 Dec 2023, p. 8).

The question is how to achieve this. Here we benefit from the step taken in the previous section in which we populated the Norm Life Cycle framework with the relevant actors.  Now we need to take this one step further and consider these actors not in isolation but as potential collaborators in a common project. The relevance of doing this was stressed in our previous blog which emphasized the role of coalitions in promoting renewable energy.

There are signs that some policy actors (facilitators of frugal innovation!) are starting to join hands and build alliances with like-minded stakeholders. Some policy makers at the provincial and European levels have been pro-active in generating interest in frugal innovation thinking, and in trying to convince their colleagues and political chiefs of its importance. Such frontrunners are important allies in attempts to weld stronger coalitions with like-minded norm entrepreneurs and other facilitators to push towards the key tipping point towards norm cascading.

Still, as a diverse community of facilitators, we need to become more strategic about the need to really act in tandem as norm entrepreneurs. As shown in our previous blog mentioned above, one can go further and build selective and temporary coalitions with stakeholders who may well have other ulterior objectives but would lend support to the initiative in question. This also applies here. While actors may have very different motives for promoting frugal innovation, we need to pragmatically form alliances to create critical mass.  For example, actors whose prime concern is the fostering of local economic development or the promotion of Small and Medium Enterprise could become allies in supporting frugal innovation projects and policies. Operationally, we can start with developing a set of appealing pitches for various audiences of why and how frugal innovation will help to address some of the grand challenges of our time. Further sector- and region-specific research is needed to substantiate and concretize such pitches.

There is an alternative route from norm emergence to norm cascading in which early adopters play the key role. Let us explain. So far, we have assumed that the norms emerge in the context of poor communities. Indeed, frugal innovation research has tended to unearth examples of innovations which are resource saving and are affordable by the poor from the start. However, we need to recognise that some innovations are expensive to start with and become affordable by the poor later in the product life cycle. This is why we introduced the category of early adopters as facilitators of frugal innovation. These early adopters tend to be young, rich and well-educated, and they demonstrate a sustainable lifestyle and make it fashionable. This matters because the more others aspire to such lifestyles the faster the decline in prices and the greater the affordability by the not-so-well off. Researchers can contribute by showing examples of communities where frugal innovation thinking – taking this route – has become the way to move forward. In other words, a concern with the dynamics of frugal innovation leads us to also consider this route from norm emergence to norm cascading.

As stressed in the beginning, the Norm Life Cycle framework helps us to unpack the time dimension and creates the mental space for exploring processes and sequences. We have seen that bringing about a cascading effect is a huge challenge. Once frugal innovation reaches the norm cascading stage, policy and law makers are crucial to further consolidate this in the norm internalization stage. Moreover, the early adopters can pave the way towards norm internalization by setting the example of more frugal consumption patterns, out of choice, not necessity. For this norm internalization to occur it would benefit from a vision that is aspirational and expresses both the resource saving and affordability of our ambition. We propose ‘frugal prosperity for all’ as the vision to strive for.

This article was first published here

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the authors:

Hubert Schmitz is a renowned development economist specializing in sustainable industrialization, investment politics, and green transformations with 40 years of expertise.

Peter Knorringa, is a Professor at Erasmus University Rotterdam, and specializes in the multifaceted influence of businesses on development.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

ChatGPT can be our ally when conducting scientific research — but academic integrity must guide its use

By Posted on 3344 views

[vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1592900783478{margin-right: 0px !important;margin-left: 0px !important;}”][vc_column css=”.vc_custom_1592900766479{margin-right: 10px !important;margin-left: -10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]Several papers that have recently been published in peer-reviewed journals display obvious signs of having been written by the AI tool ChatGPT. This has sparked a heated online debate about the transparency of research communication and academic integrity in cases where AI is used in the academic writing process. In this blog article, Kim Tung Dao discusses the ethical implications of using AI for academic writing and ponders the future impact of AI in academic research, urging for a balance between the efficiency of AI tools and research integrity.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_single_image image=”28106″ img_size=”full” alignment=”center”][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]

Used for everything from streamlining everyday tasks to revolutionizing industries, artificial intelligence (AI) has come to profoundly affect our lives in the past few decades. The emergence of new forms of AI in recent years has led to a heated debate in academia about whether students should be allowed to use AI tools — usually large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT — in their writing. And if they are permitted, a related question is to what extent they should be used, especially in higher education.

A new issue related to the rise of LLMs is now rearing its head within the realm of scientific research: the publication of LLM-generated content in peer-reviewed journals. This worrying trend reflects not only the rapid advancements in LLMs’ ability to replicate human work but also gives rise to discussions on the ethics of research (communication) and research integrity.

More and more researchers are attempting to leverage generative AI such as ChatGPT to act as a highly productive research assistant. It is very tempting to have an LLM compose content for you, as these AI-generated pieces often exhibit sophisticated language, conduct statistical analyses seamlessly, and even discuss new research findings expertly. The line between human- and machine-generated content is blurring. In addition, these LLMs work tirelessly and quickly, which can be considered highly beneficial for human scholars.

However, beneath the surface of effectiveness and efficiency lies a complex labyrinth of ethical concerns and potential repercussions for the integrity of scientific research. Publishing academic research in journals remains the most popular way for many researchers to disseminate their findings, communicate with their peers, and contribute to scientific knowledge production. Peer reviewing ensures that research findings and truth claims are meticulously evaluated by experts in the field to sustain quality and credibility in the formulation of academic theories and policy recommendations. Hence, when papers with AI-generated content are published in peer-reviewed journals, readers can’t help but question the integrity of the entire scientific publishing process.

There is a big difference between receiving assistance from generative AI and allowing it to generate entire or significant parts of research texts without appropriate supervision and monitoring. These can entail smaller tasks such as proofreading AI-generated content before its distribution/publication but can also play a much more critical role in ensuring the originality and significance of AI-enhanced research. This is why this article seeks to reflect on the abuse of AI in the writing of academic texts by researchers and provides commentary on the insufficiency of the current peer-review system. I also try to initiate a thoughtful discussion on the implications of AI for the future of research.

Falling through the cracks

The latest volume of Elsevier’s Surfaces and Interfaces journal recently caught the attention of researchers on X (Twitter), as one of its papers has evidently been written by ChatGPT. The first line of the paper states: “Certainly, here is a possible introduction for your topic: […].” Any ChatGPT user knows that this is the typical reply generated by the LLM when it responds to a prompt. Without any expertise in AI or other related fields, a common ChatGPT user with normal common sense can therefore tell that this sentence and at least the following paragraph, if not many others, has been generated by ChatGPT.

But this paper is certainly not the only one in this new line of LLM-generated publications. ChatGPT prompt replies have been found in other papers published in different peer-reviewed journals and are not limited to any specific fields of science. For example, a case report published in Radiology Case Reports (another Elsevier journal) includes a whole ChatGPT prompt reply stating “I’m very sorry, but I don’t have access to real-time information or patient-specific data, as I am an AI language model. I can provide general information about […], but for specific cases, it is essential to consult with a medical professional […].”

Hallucinating information

What is more worrisome is the quality, integrity, and credibility of scientific research conducted by these LLMs, as ChatGPT has the tendency to hallucinate information and draws on seemingly non-existent citations and references to support the texts it generates. For example, in a forum discussion where contributors talked about detecting AI-generated content in academic publications, one contributor pointed out that they could not find the references cited in a paper titled “Automatic Detection of Coagulation of Blood in Brain Using Deep Learning Approach”. Several other cases are mentioned in the discussion thread.

Besides likely contributing to the publication of false or unevidenced information, the use of LLMs in the writing up of scientific research also highlights the failure of peer reviewers to catch or question these practices, showing either their carelessness or their irresponsibility. The peer-review system has long served as the gatekeeper of scholarly knowledge, aiming to uphold high standards of quality, integrity, and credibility that are part and parcel of academic research and publishing. But with obvious evidence of LLM-generated content being included in papers published in peer-reviewed journals, it might be time to start questioning the transparency and accountability inherent in the peer-review process. When a peer-review publication starts with a ChatGPT’s typical prologue, it’s reasonable to wonder how such article was reviewed.

A call for responsible use

AI is not all bad. Clearly, it can be a powerful assistant to researchers in the research process, used for anything ranging from brainstorming, developing research strategies, coding, analyzing empirical results, and language editing to acting as a competently critical reviewer to provide useful and helpful feedback for excellent improvement. But to work with this powerful assistant, researchers still need to have a solid knowledge of the research topic, make significant decisions on the research strategy, and, most importantly, ensure that the research is an original contribution to the literature and can be applied. Relying heavily on AI to finish a research project without understanding the foundation and the essence of the research is plainly ethical contamination and fraudulent behavior.

AI is not a scientific researcher — and might never be

Beyond the immediate finger-pointing at the peer-reviewed system and research practices, the increasing influence of AI in research outputs carries broader implications for the role and integrity of human researchers, the nature of scientific discovery, and the social perception of AI. Even if the potential for deception and manipulation is ignored, AI-generated research outputs might still lack genuine insights, critical analysis, and might fail to take into account ethical considerations without human guidance. Moreover, in order for research outputs to be meaningful for human life and society, they need to be validated by human researchers.

We don’t necessarily need to fear AI; we do need to fear the improper use of AI, and we need to play an active role in preventing this from happening. Thus, instead of fearing being replaced by AI, human researchers should start acknowledging its abilities and using it to shape our projects. Let’s board this technological advancement ship to escalate our research efficiency and accelerate the speed of scientific discovery. But let us remain cautious. We are responsible for ensuring that AI contributes to instead of compromises scientific knowledge production.

Writing this post with the help of ChatGPT 3.5 (which I used to improve my language), I can’t help but recall the question I was asked when receiving my doctoral degree: “Do you promise to continue to perform your duties according to the principles of academic integrity: honestly and with care; critically and transparently; and independently and impartially?”

I promise.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1713430703942{margin-top: 0px !important;}”]

About the author:

Kim Tung Dao is a recent PhD graduate of the International Institute of Social Studies. Her research interests include globalization, international trade, development, and the history of economic thought.

 [/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column css=”.vc_custom_1596795191151{margin-top: 5% !important;}”][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text][newsletter][/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Public spaces as learning arenas: How parks and playgrounds contribute to early childhood development

By Posted on 5383 views

Public spaces, especially areas facilitating outdoor play and learning, play a pivotal role in early childhood development. However, they are often framed as mere recreational zones by urban planners and policymakers. In this article, ISS PhD researcher Ana Badillo highlights the multifaceted benefits of parks and playgrounds and emphasizes the need for collaborative community-driven urban planning as a way to counter dominant narratives of parks. Using Bellavista’s park transformation as a case study, she champions spaces that prioritize children’s holistic development, foster social cohesion, and help reimagine urban landscapes.

Children learn as they play. Most importantly, in play children learn how to learn.” – O. Fred Donaldson

In the hustle and bustle of modern urban life, public spaces like parks and playgrounds are often viewed simply as recreational outlets for city residents. Yet, these spaces transcend mere recreation; they serve as vital arenas for comprehensive early childhood development [1].
As a mother, I have come to understand that play is the primary way that children learn about the world around them — an essential mechanism that fosters physical, socio-emotional, cognitive, and motor development [2]. Parks and playgrounds offer a plethora of play opportunities, from simple swings to complex structures, allowing children to test their limits, develop their problem-solving capacity, and practice essential life skills. Here are some of the primary benefits of public spaces and outdoor play:

 

1. They provide opportunities to develop essential life skills. Sharing, negotiating turns on the slide, or participating in group games all teach children valuable lessons in cooperation, conflict resolution, and empathy. This enables them to become adults who can effectively work in teams, appreciate different perspectives, and handle interpersonal challenges with sensitivity and maturity.

2. They serve as meeting places for children (and parents) from different backgrounds and cultures. Playgrounds and parks can foster intercultural interaction and understanding, providing opportunities for children from diverse backgrounds to interact and learn from each other. These interactions not only enrich a child’s social experience but also lay the groundwork for a more inclusive and understanding society where differences are celebrated and mutual respect is cultivated from a young age.

3. They enable increased physical activity. With the rising concern of childhood obesity worldwide, and particularly in Latin America [3], parks act as necessary venues for physical activity. Climbing, running, and jumping contribute to motor skill development and significantly contribute to children’s physical fitness and reduces the risk of childhood obesity [4], [5].

4. They can contribute to an improved relationship with nature. Frequent interaction with and play with/in nature during childhood has long-term benefits, fostering a lasting relationship with the natural environment. Children who regularly interact with natural elements develop a sense of wonder, curiosity, and respect for the environment. This early bond with nature fosters a lifelong commitment to environmental stewardship [6].

While the value of parks and playgrounds in early childhood development is increasingly recognized by parents and caregivers, urban planning still tends to sideline these areas as mere recreational spaces. The message is clear then: we as the parent community need to champion the comprehensive role of public spaces in child development. How? Through collective urban planning approaches.

 

Bellavista’s play park: An example of a low-cost, high-impact community-led project

A newly transformed park in Bellavista, a hilly neighbourhood in Ecuador’s capital Quito, stands as an emblematic example of how impactful low-cost initiatives can be when driven by community engagement. As a resident and a mother, I’ve witnessed the park’s evolution from a neglected area to a vibrant green, playful haven. A year ago, the park was barely functional, but the community’s proactive approach, starting with securing funding from the municipality’s participatory budgets, initiated its transformation.

However, the revamped space would lack a children’s playground due to budget limits, which sparked a new wave of community action. Several parents, including myself, told the community leaders at the inauguration of the revamped park that we need a playground for our children. I expressed to the community leaders my desire to volunteer, sharing my experience in participating in the design of parks, which I witnessed and participated in as a resident in Delft while living in the Netherlands. I requested to hold a meeting with the community leaders to start thinking about the design and funding of the playground.

In May 2023, a small group of community leaders, grandparents, aunts, and I convened the first meeting, where we proposed the idea of making the design of the playground a participatory process. This process would actively involve children, parents, and caregivers. We share various ideas for playgrounds and discussed the child- and family-friendly principles that we would like to use for co-creating public spaces. This initiated a project fuelled by the neighbourhood residents’ aspirations and it was later supported and led by several organizations.

PLURAL led the design, management, and implementation (the construction of the playground and socio-environmental sensory circuit) of the project Recorridos Con Sentidos (Pathways with Senses), along with various social organizations and collectives in Quito, including Yura, Acción Ecológica, Cabildo Cívico de Quito, and Bellavista neighbourhood committees. PLURAL won an international public space contest led by LAPIS and Placemaking Mexico, which was pivotal in designing and constructing an early childhood-centric playground guided by a participatory process. The creative signage of the project was carried out by artist Natalia Espinosa, a member of the community and team.

From a collective dream to a beautiful reality

The community’s journey to design Bellavista Park was a blend of determination and creativity. Engaging methodologies from LAPIS, like the ‘magic camera’ and children’s drawings, were used to capture young minds’ visions for the park. These ideas were not just fanciful dreams; they became the blueprint for the park’s design. Parents, grandparents, caregivers, and early childhood educators joined in, providing valuable insights and fostering discussions about creating a safe play environment.

Photo by Project Recorridos Con Sentidos

Photo by Project Recorridos Con Sentidos

The transformation, completed in just three weeks, is a testament to the power of cost-effective solutions and community involvement. Utilizing recycled materials and harnessing the energy of volunteers, the project minimized costs while maximizing community engagement and pride. Workshops and collaborative activities, such as tree planting and establishing park maintenance protocols, cemented the community’s commitment to the park’s sustainability.

A symbol of community resilience

Today, Bellavista’s play park is more than just a space; it’s a symbol of community resilience and innovation. It has become a lively hub where families come together, where children engage in play that is both fun and developmental, and where the community celebrates its collective achievement. This transformation, fuelled by the dreams and efforts of children and their families, has reinvented the park into a sanctuary of learning and joy, specifically tailored for the needs of early childhood.

The community’s deep sense of ownership and pride in this space is palpable. My two-year-old girl no longer merely says, “Mommy, take me to the park,” but confidently claims, “Mommy, take me to MY park.” Parents, too, are immersed in this renewal, forging new relationships and orchestrating community events (Halloween Festival). More than just a playground, this park serves as the heart of the community, weaving together social ties and fostering unity in times of profound need.

 

Towards collaborative urban planning

The park’s remarkable transformation has not only attracted nearby families and childcare providers who were previously unaware of its existence but has also drawn residents from all corners of Quito, turning it into a beloved destination for recreation and childhood exploration. This bottom-up initiative has served as an inspirational example for other communities. Residents from diverse neighbourhoods across the city when visiting this park all expressed their desire for a similar space for their children in their own neighbourhoods, which underscores the widespread need for such interventions.

Access to safe, green, and areas for playing should not be a privilege reserved only for a few children living in gated communities in suburban zones, as is unfortunately still the case in most cities. Such spaces can be created throughout the city, but it is crucial for local authorities to recognize that public spaces, like parks, must cater to the desires and needs of their users. To make parks truly conducive for early childhood, authorities should begin by actively listening to the voices of young children and their caregivers, as the developers of Bellavista’s park did. Placemaking programmes endorsing the community-led co-design and co-creation of public spaces can ensure that such spaces are welcoming, safe, and conducive to learning and play.

References

[1] Islam, M.Z., Johnston, J. and Sly, P.D., 2020. Green space and early childhood development: a systematic review. Reviews on environmental health, 35(2), pp.189-200.

[2] Ginsburg, K.R. and Committee on Psychosocial Aspects of Child and Family Health, 2007. The importance of play in promoting healthy child development and maintaining strong parent-child bonds. Pediatrics, 119(1), pp.182-191.

[3] 3 in 10 children and adolescents in Latin America and the Caribbean have overweight (unicef.org)

[4] Bell, J.F., Wilson, J.S. and Liu, G.C., 2008. Neighborhood greenness and 2-year changes in body mass index of children and youth. American journal of preventive medicine, 35(6), pp.547-553.

[5] Sanders, T., Feng, X., Fahey, P.P., Lonsdale, C. and Astell-Burt, T., 2015. Greener neighbourhoods, slimmer children? Evidence from 4423 participants aged 6 to 13 years in the Longitudinal Study of Australian children. International Journal of Obesity, 39(8), pp.1224-1229.

[6] Chawla, L., 2006. Learning to love the natural world enough to protect it. Barn–forskning om barn og barndom i Norden, 24(2).

Documentation of the Collaborative Journey of the Park Co-Design and Co-Creation María Elena Rodríguez Y. on X: “El pasado sábado realizamos la entrega a la ciudad del proyecto #RecorridosConSentidos, que se propuso crear espacios públicos específicamente para niñez temprana, es decir, niños y niñas de 0-6 años y sus cuidadores/as. Este espacio, el primero público en #Quito fue realizado… https://t.co/ksnuwacweo” / X (twitter.com)

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Ana Badillo is a PhD researcher at the ISS, focusing on the political economy of social protection reforms in Ecuador and Paraguay. She works at the Partnership for Economic Policy (PEP) as Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Senior Specialist. She is also a Fellow at Our Kids’ Climate, advocating for a just, green, and safe present and future for children in Ecuador.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Feeling the Crux of Justice

By Posted on 2751 views

Justice and mobility are intertwined elements of our civilization and affect all of us significantly. Through two blog posts, Bachelor’s students of Erasmus University Rotterdam Kaitlan Adams, Cassandra Kamberi and Yannis Diakantonis discuss affective justice and mobility, drawing on their individual experiences and perceptions. This post reflects on their diverse understandings of what justice is and, most importantly, how it feels like.

Image by Steve Johnson/Pexels

Justice is not really about holy scriptures, legal artifacts, or the dialogues of a “Suits” episode. As Kamari Maxine Clarke points out in her concept of ‘affective justice’, developed in her 2019 book Affective Justice: The International Criminal Court and the Pan-Africanist Pushback, it is “affective” and hugely influenced by our emotions. Exactly because justice is so inextricably linked to personal emotions, it automatically becomes subjective and, hence, potentially divergent between individuals. That is why a universal definition of justice is hard to come by, despite the proliferation of “best” strategies to achieve it. The feeling of justice is very difficult to delineate; it feels like anger, it feels like control, it feels like a type of equity. All at the same time.

‘We perceive justice to be correlated with what we feel is right.’ In a general sense, we define justice as the fair and impartial treatment of others. On an emotional level, justice feels like a mixture of empathy and anger. On one hand, having empathy for both those who have been wronged and those inflicting injustice is what is needed to achieve equitable outcomes. Empathy means understanding and sharing the feelings of others. On the other hand, anger is also connected to justice because where empathy is lacking, we feel anger. We felt anger and a lack of justice when one of us experienced sexual harassment. We felt a lack of empathy from the people who did this. We felt anger at societal expectations that have normalized these behaviours. Understanding justice in its affective dimension highlights that justice could be achieved; if women’s feelings were actualized and if the emotional root cause of toxic masculine behaviours was acknowledged. For justice to be achieved, practices that cater to emotional causes and consequences must be mobilized.

‘For us, justice goes hand in hand with a feeling of control.’ Namely, control over the most fundamental aspects of our lives, as well as control over the process of restoring the system of values and laws we have all collectively agreed upon. In other words, justice feels like confidence that one’s basic rights and dignity will be respected (Cremer & Bos, 2007). Upon coming to the Netherlands for his studies, Yannis wanted to join the football club of our university. The problem? All the other players and coaches were a group of Dutch friends who had known each other for years. Nevertheless, they immediately tried to break down any linguistic or national barriers that might have existed between them. Hence, Yannis felt that justice was being done to his body, his ambitions, and his social interactions while playing the sport that he had loved ever since he was a little child.

‘After quite some thought, we realized that our sense of justice is based on a feeling of life-value equity.’ We believe there are some “fundamental” truths that when violated, lead to injustice. The biggest fundamental truth for us is that all life is equal in value. For example, it feels utterly unjust that some people in the world live in wealth and luxury, while at the same time, others live in poverty and suffering. The fact that our contemporary economies and systems of production perpetuate this situation (making this gap even bigger whilst exploiting people), makes a statement about how and whose lives we value most. Such an unjust way of doing things feels disturbing, leading us to the conclusion that we must dedicate our lives toward somehow lessening this inequitable way of life. Otherwise, we would once again be part of a huge injustice without truly contesting it.

‘Reflecting on how to restore justice,’ we  recognize that its various perceptions, as well as the numerous inherent differences between individuals, can present a challenge when trying to create a universally applicable definition. This tension is equally tangible in the extensive Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry on justice (Miller, 2021). Since justice is so important, yet feels so different to each of us, perhaps the first important action we can take is to understand each other. Talking with our neighbours about what injustice feels to them could be a small first step. Perhaps the feeling of control can be obtained through dialogue and expression; anger about injustice can be resolved when it is no longer suppressed; equity in the value of life could be achieved through radical reforms of our socioeconomic systems. Through building communities that thrive on mutual understanding and creating institutions that reflect the diversity of emotional responses to justice, we could develop a more inclusive and holistic reality of a just world—one that reflects a multitude of lenses.

Bibliography

Clarke, K. M. (2019). “Affective Justice: The Racialized Imaginaries of International Justice.” PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 244–267, https://doi.org/10.1111/plar.12307.

De Cremer, D. and K. van den Bos (2007). “Justice and Feelings: Toward a New Era in Justice Research.” Social Justice Research, vol. 20, no. 1, Mar. 2007, pp. 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-007-0031-2.

Johnson. http://www.pexels.com/photo/blue-yellow-and-orange-canvas-painting-2362791/.

Miller, D. (2017). “Justice.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 26 June 2017, plato.stanford.edu/entries/justice/.

Read their first article on Justice and Mobility.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the authors:

Kaitlan Adams is a third year Bachelor’s student in Erasmus University College. Majoring in Political Science and International Relations, with a double-minor in International Human Rights Law, as well as Arts, Culture, and Society, Kaitlan has interests in working with NGOs that fight for human-rights and has a background in teaching English to underprivileged Youth.

Cassandra Kamberi is a third year bachelor student majoring in Psychology and Philosophy at EUR. She is a board member of Positive Impact Society Erasmus (PISE), aiming to help students identify how they can have the most positive impact they can with their career and resources. Some of her projects include running a committee alongside other students for Improving Institutional Decision Making,  and writing her philosophy thesis on the mental health crisis. Perhaps her biggest interest lies in understanding what drives suffering in human beings even when all their basic needs are met, and how we can potentially alleviate this suffering through both cultural reform and individual practices.

Yannis Diakantonis is a third year Bachelor’s student and Research Assistant in Erasmus University Rotterdam. Some of his current research projects relate to candidate selection and electoral systems in the context of developing countries. He has worked in several NGOs which, among others, promote Climate Neutrality, Green Finance and Sustainable Digitalization.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Development Dialogue 19 | Participatory art as an alternative project monitoring tool? How an INGO is using picture diaries in Timor-Leste

By Posted on 2787 views

International development projects need to be monitored to see whether they are on the right track. Although the logical framework (log frame), which depends on a standard indicator for monitoring project outcomes, is widely used, it often proves insufficient in capturing progress made by beneficiaries. In this blog article, Young-Gil Kim discusses why alternative monitoring systems are needed and introduces picture diaries as an alternative monitoring tool . He shows how international NGO ThePromise has used these diaries in Timor-Leste to hear from illiterate children and argues that participatory arts have the potential to capture project progress in contexts where conventional monitoring systems frequently encounter challenges.

Image by Author

The log frame: a silver bullet?

While I was working for an aid funding agency (which I did for around eight years), I frequently used the log frame — a monitoring tool in which inputs and activities yield short-term outputs and long-term results — to monitor project progress. Regardless of whom I worked with — UNESCO, the ILO, the UNDP, and so on — the log frame was consistently employed. I kept wondering whether it was truly the silver bullet it was being portrayed as. Briefly speaking, it is a rigid tool  that relies on quantitative surveys. Development practitioners with statistical skills use it to observe causal relationships between the input/activity and output. However, in other development sectors such as governance projects, causal relationships are often more complex, and it takes much longer to see changes.

Some time later, when talking to volunteers working for international NGO ThePromise who were implementing an educational project in Timor-Leste, the question popped up in my mind once again when Jisu An[1], one of the volunteers, told me that monitoring educational progress in illiterate children was challenging because good indicators seemed not to exist. Even if they did, she said, because the children targeted by the project are mostly illiterate, surveying them on paper seemed counterintuitive.

I decided to study the problem by delving into the literature on the topic. I found that the international development arena, saturated with the log frame, leads us to believe that it upholds a profound tradition, while the reality is quite different. First, it was “originally created as a planning tool for military purposes” in the US and later adopted by USAID in the 1970s . Second, the log frame is “virtually unknown outside the development community, and it is noteworthy that it has not been adopted to any great extent elsewhere.” Thus, there is concern that the log frame is “[used] indiscriminately across all programs in the development scene regardless of the nature of the work being measured: from agriculture to human rights, from micro-finance to culture.” This might also be the case for ThePromise, I thought, which might explain why they were facing challenges. I spoke to volunteers such as Jisu An about their work for ThePromise and presented some of my observations and findings at the recent Development Dialogue conference, which I also discuss in this article.

 

Tracking the progress of a teaching programme in rural Timor-Leste

ThePromise is an NGO (with its HQ is in Seoul, South Korea) that seeks to “provide better opportunities” in several developing countries by conducting projects ranging from education, water and sanitation/hygiene, and disaster relief to credit cooperative initiatives. In Timor-Leste, the NGO in 2023 focused on the education sector and was active in a few rural, marginalized areas inundated with challenging educational conditions. This includes mostly illiterate children, teaching methods not provided to many Timorese teachers, insufficient teaching materials, and parents not paying adequate attention to their children’s education. A team of ten South Korean volunteers had been dispatched there, where they taught children in two kindergartens to strengthen the educational environment of the community and improve education standards. Monitoring the project’s progress through the log frame was one of their important tasks.

This proved challenging due to the high illiteracy rate and the young age of many of the children they taught. Hence, they could not complete survey forms specified in their log frame. After having several meetings by themselves, the teachers decided to use picture diaries as an alternative to the survey. After each class, children drew pictures of how they experienced the lesson. The aim was for teachers to monitor their progress effectively using these picture diaries.

Picture 1: Adu’s Picture Diary on 15 March 2023

Picture 2: Adu’s Picture Diary on 10 May 2023

 

 

 

 

 

 

These two picture diaries were drawn by a Timorese child named Adu. The left-hand diary depicts Adu’s reflections on his daily class on 15 March 2023, while the picture diary on the right, drawn a mere two months later, demonstrates a noticeable improvement in Adu’s ability to articulate his daily learning experiences — the pictures are more detailed, and Adu’s writing has progressed from simply adding individual words to writing complete sentences.

This led me, as an independent researcher who once questioned the widespread use of the log frame, to ask whether participatory art could serve as an alternative to the log frame tool for monitoring project progress. Participatory art is gaining traction in the international development arena because it offers spaces for envisioning futures and cultivates critical thinking. Inspired by the MSC method, I interviewed four Korean teachers who assessed around 200 children’s picture diaries for four consecutive months. They all felt that the diaries were a good tool for children to express themselves. One teacher for example stated:

I believe that the picture diary is a good tool for monitoring children’s educational progress. When we introduced it in the early stages of our education programme, children rarely expressed themselves; there were no writings and no pictures. As time went by, their ability to express themselves improved. Some of them could articulate their thoughts on sketchbooks in written form as well as through pictures. I also observed that in the early stages, children just added a few words in their sketchbooks, whereas a few weeks later, they started to write in full sentences, articulating themselves better than before. I think the picture diary serves not only as a good tracking tool but also as a means to encourage children to express themselves freely.

Another teacher felt that more research was needed to assess its effectiveness as a monitoring tool, stating, “I […] think that three months is not a sufficient timeline to see any tangible changes in [the children’s way of expressing their experiences].” Overall, the teachers thought that the diaries were primarily a means for children to express themselves. Their effectiveness as an alternative monitoring system — and that of participatory art in general — therefore still needs to be determined. Participatory art could perhaps complement conventional approaches such as the log frame, especially in contexts where surveys cannot be used, until its effectiveness as a monitoring tool has been further investigated.

References

Davies, R. (2005). The ‘Most Significant Change’ (MSC) Technique: A Guide to Its Use. UK: Care International.

Flower, E. and Kelly, R. (2018). Arts-based research practices and alternatives: reflections on workshops in Uganda and Bangladesh. Changing the Story Working Paper No.3

Fontes, C. (2016). The What and the How: Rethinking Evaluation Practice for the Arts and Development. In Stupples, P. and Katerina Teaiwa (eds). Contemporary Perspectives on Art and International Development. Taylor & Francis. pp. 238–251.

Hailey, J. & Sorgenfrei, M. (2004). Measuring Success: Issues in Performance Management. Occasional Paper Series 44, Oxford: INTRAC

Mkwananzi, W.F., Cin, F.M., and Marovah, T. (2021). Participatory art for navigating political capabilities and aspirations among rural youth in Zimbabwe. Third World Quarterly, 42(12), 2863–2882.

Stupples, P. and Teaiwa, K. (2016). Introduction: On Art and International Development. In Stupples, P. and Katerina Teaiwa (eds). Contemporary Perspectives on Art and International Development. Taylor & Francis. pp. 1–24.

Tools4Dev website: https://tools4dev.org/about/

[1] Thanks go to Jisu An who helped shape my thoughts on the issue through our many interesting discussions and for providing valuable input into the article.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Young-Gil Kim is a PhD student at the University of York, UK. He worked as a visiting researcher at the Center for Korean Studies (CKS) in the National University of Timor-Leste (UNTL) in 2023.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

Caring About Peace: Care as Inclusion and Transformation in Peacebuilding

By Posted on 3515 views

Drawing off interviews with peacebuilding practitioners working in Palestine, Sudan and Yemen, this blog considers how peacebuilding practices can be enhanced with a lens of care. How does centring care relations of interdependency impact what is understood as peacebuilding? How can decision making and participation become more inclusive? And what are the implications for the construction of Global North/South dichotomy informing humanitarian intervention?

Image by artemisgone/Pixabay

Puig de la Bellacasa (2017) sits with the trouble of understanding the significance and ambivalence of care by stating “care is omnipresent, even through the effects of its absence” (p. 1). The ‘absence’ of care is particularly visible during conflict, as care tasks may become more urgent and challenging. Likewise, care relations are severed when people die or become displaced, and numbers of injured people requiring care may increase (Robinson, 2011 p. 96). In the context of peace and conflict, some scholars argue that care, and the gendered power relations that go with it, cuts through social practices (Vaittinen et al., 2019, p. 3).

With this framing of care, my thesis research sought to explore how peacebuilding with a care lens can enable inclusion and strengthen extant situated caring practices. I explored this in conversations with peacebuilding professionals implementing programs under the Dutch NAP-IV, Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women Peace and Security (WPS), in Palestine, Sudan and Yemen.

Analysis of peacebuilding programs with a care lens

Across three country contexts, every conversation revealed how care relations are constituted in a lineage of unequal power structures – specifically, colonialism, patriarchy, and racism.

These conversations revealed how without explicitly considering people with care roles and their specific needs, peacebuilding programs inadvertently excluded people with care roles in their approach. This exclusion is in direct contradiction to the NAP-IV outcome of increasing women’s equal and meaningful participation in decision-making in peace and security processes. Moreover, excluding people with care roles – who may face multiple aspects of structural marginalisation – impedes upon their needs, rights, expertise and experiences shaping the discourse of what peace and security means, for whom, and how it is attained. This exclusion furthers the devaluation and marginalisation of people who care – and the role of care itself – in society. So, , what could embedding a care lens add to these programs?

Embodying caring values: attentive listening and responding to needs

Practicing caring values such as attentive listening, patience, humility and seeking to understand the context can support better understanding and response to needs of affected communities in peacebuilding programs. This can include asking ‘How are care relations disrupted by the conflict? Have sites of care (e.g. community spaces and homes) been destroyed in the conflict? How are gendered dynamics impacted by the conflict? How are marginalised groups impacted by the conflict? Whose needs are being met, and whose are not?’ This echoes the recommendations in the Peace Direct et al. Decolonising Aid (2021) report where practitioners advised INGOs to “listen, listen, listen”, and “act with humility” (p. 36).

Designing to include

In my conversations with peacebuilding professionals, I heard examples of listening and responding to needs in practice. Based in Sudan, Amina* spoke of advising colleagues in the program, “Always, I tell them that we need to do our listening before conducting any activity in the community. Just go to the community, listen from them directly. Listen for the women, listen for their stories. And after that, let us come and sit and think and try to know the kind of intervention that we need for this community”. This practice of attentive listening, utilising relational ontology and situated knowledge of the context, can be embedded in the needs assessment prior to program design and implementation.

Based in Palestine, Sahar* reflected on a lack of understanding of unpaid care work as a barrier to participation: “This is a huge burden that might prevent women from engagement and participation in public life in general … we are talking about women’s political participation and participation in decision-making process”.

A needs assessment must embody an ethics of care, and be attuned to structural barriers to participation. Practically, this entails specifying who does the listening (e.g., someone with existing relations to the community), who is listened to (e.g., marginalised communities), and identifying existing relations of care and seeking to strengthen these, while being attuned to how different forms of power exist and are distributed in society, impacting relations of dependency as mutual or exploitative.

Having a more comprehensive understanding of the specific needs of people in a conflict-affected community can support inclusive program design, such as providing childcare during program events and scheduling events in times and places which are not restrictive for people to attend. Addressing these barriers enables peace and security discourse to be more reflective of the lived realities, needs and aspirations of all people affected by the conflict.

 

Implications for humanitarian intervention

Thinking about peace with a care lens supports us to centre a recognition of interdependence across national borders, and challenges the construction of power within the longstanding Global North/South dichotomy in humanitarian intervention. A care analysis highlights the capacity and expertise of people who are situated in a conflict-affected context to understand and respond to needs of particular others, as such relations of giving and receiving care exist before, during and after the conflict. This framing aligns with the broader localisation agenda.

This does not suggest international actors have no role or responsibility in supporting conflict-affected communities. Ethics of care highlights the experience of interconnected needs, dependency and vulnerability transcending national borders, and is attuned to the historical and ongoing impacts of colonisation which influence whose needs are met, and whose are not. From here, the role of humanitarian intervention must be to strengthen local activities/approaches, and redistribute resources to do this, rather than undermine or overshadow local initiatives.

Everyday peace theorists contend that without a consideration of how care operates in peace efforts “it follows that various mundane practices of caring that are crucial in creating trust and peaceful conflict transformation are either taken for granted, or remain invisible” (Vaittinen et al., 2019, p. 3). As the conflicts in Sudan, Yemen and Palestine continue and civilian deaths increase every day, care relations are severed, strained and remade. Humanitarian intervention must seek to strengthen mundane, everyday practices of care in efforts to support and sustain peace that is by, and for, people situated in the conflict context.

References

*Note, interview participant names changed to maintain anonymity

Peace Direct, Adeso, Alliance for Peacebuilding and Women of Color Advancing Peace and Security and Conflict Transformation. (2021) Time to Decolonial Aid – Insights and lessons from a global consultation. Peace Direct, London. Available at: PDDecolonising_Aid_Report_Second_Edition.pdf (peaceinsight.s3.amazonaws.com) (Accessed 19 October 2023).

Puig de la Bellacasa, M. (2017) ‘The Disruptive Thought of Care’, in Puig de la Bellacasa, M. (ed.) Matters of care: speculative ethics in more than human worlds. United Kingdom: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 1-24.

Robinson, F. (2011a) The Ethics of Care; A Feminist Approach to Human Security. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

Vaittinen, T., Donahoe, A., Kunz, R., Bára Ómarsdóttir, S. and Roohi, S. (2019) ‘Care as everyday peacebuilding’, Peacebuilding, 7(2), pp. 194-209. doi: 10.1080/21647259.2019.1588453 https://doi.org/10.1080/21647259.2019.158845 3.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Ebony Westman holds a MA in Development Studies, specialising in Peace and Conflict Studies from ISS (2023) and a MA in Gender Studies from Utrecht University (2017). Ebony is committed to intersectional gender advocacy and exploring this in the context of peace, conflict and care.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

Development Dialogue 19 | The right to be heard: How listening to children’s perspectives can help challenge North–South dichotomies in development

By Posted on 1741 views

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) is the most ratified international human rights treaty in the world. But much more needs to be done to ensure that more children have their voices heard on their needs and perspectives. In this blog article, Timisha Dadhich acknowledges the nuanced experiences of children in the Global South with the example of children’s representation within the normative debates on child labour. We need a pragmatic child rights-based approach that prioritizes the inclusion of children, respects children’s agency, and fosters intergenerational collaboration to effectively ensure children get the right support as soon as they need it, she argues.

Image by Leonardo Burgos/Unsplash

Children’s voices still go unheard

There is a robust understanding in international law that children and young people hold the fundamental right to freely express their views on anything that impacts them. Article 12 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child of 1989 notably recognizes that children have the right to be heard.[i] This convention implies that children are agents who can determine their own fate through their involvement in decision-making processes instead of being passive recipients of aid.[ii] However, the lack of representation of children’s perspectives in development research and practice persists, and many development initiatives are contributing to persistent disparities instead of having an enduring and sustainable impact. We are still not listening to children despite our pledge to heed their right to be heard.

How can we prevent this from happening? We first need to remind ourselves why we need to listen to children and how it impacts them if we don’t. As I will show in this article, in order to truly enrich and enhance our understanding of the role children’s rights can and should play in development interventions, it is important to listen to the viewpoints of children that contest the normative assumption of ‘best interest of the child’.[iii] Child rights advocates believe that to improve children’s well-being, we should unlearn our assumptions about their needs.

 

Child labour requires a nuanced understanding

Take the example of child labour, which is a complex challenge, especially in post-colonial societies. Child labour is commonly either demonized or normalized; this duality in perspectives hides the bigger picture that not all forms of child labour are extreme forms (slavery and trafficking, for example). In fact, children mostly work on smallholder farms — 70% of all child labour worldwide takes place in the agriculture sector.[iv] The ‘abolitionist approach’ focused only on completely eradicating child labour denies children their right to protection from the oppressive and challenging circumstances at work, which further adds to their systematic exploitation. Institutionalization or banning child labour is seen as a one-stop solution, but the emphasis must be on protecting (working) children.[v]

Moreover, ‘rescue attempts’ are rarely successful. Due to the absence of effective measures to compensate or rehabilitate children ‘rescued’ from child labour, many children end up returning to the same work ‘post-rescue’ because of financial constraints, a lack of alternative opportunities, weak law enforcement, social pressures, and debt bondage.[vi]

India is one example. The economic and labour market disruption and increased school dropout rates after the COVID-19 pandemic worsened the child labour situation, with a growing demand for cheap labour and an amplified need for an additional household income.[vii] Thus, in India, approximately 13 million children between the ages of 7 and 17 work, primarily in the agriculture sector or doing unpaid family work.[viii] Similar trends can be observed in many other countries. It is therefore vital to understand the unique developmental stages and needs of countries and to tailor a more inclusive and just collaboration between the Global North and Global South for ensuring children’s rights.

 

We need to start recognizing children as agents and political actors

It is necessary to intervene — we need to protect children facing abuse or unsafe working environments. But while child labour undoubtedly deprives children of their rights, understanding its role in access to education and the right to survival is crucial for taking actions in the ‘best interests’ of the working children. We need to take action by listening to them. Beyond the label of ‘innocence,’ their opinions should be at the forefront when we make decisions that shape their lives.

Moreover, the dominant narrative on working children as passive victims waiting to be rescued is challenged by working children who as political actors assert their right to dignified work.[ix] Bhima Sangha, a union for working children, for example claimed, “Let anti-child labour not be anti-child,” which to me stands as a testament to the enduring struggles of working children in Asia.[x] It also demonstrates how complex the issue is and why inputs from children are crucial for finding the most suited ways to tackle it. Crucially, children have views of their own situation and of proposed interventions.

Thus, contrary to the assumptions about how to improve the working conditions and lives of children that negate children’s agency, we should define clear boundaries for policy making that assure the ‘best interests’ of the child as seen from an informed perspective. It is high time we move past the quick fixes and work towards sustainable solutions that empower both children and their communities — and asking children about their experience is an important starting point.

 

We first need to address our ‘saviour complex’

When it comes to child labour, the focus is fortunately shifting to ensuring a social protection net for children and their families instead of just banning an act. This is impacting our programme designs, research, and development projects that continue to be based on the idea of ‘saving’ working children. However, there is still some way to go. A pluralistic and critical approach to child labour would entail recognizing, first and foremost, that children don’t necessarily “need to be saved”. This patronizing mindset is also symbolic of the colonial past that is inextricably linked to the ‘saviour complex’.

 

We also need to challenge our adult-centric views 

This mindset also stops us from creating a framework that properly considers the economic, cultural, and social realities children face. Globally, children are ignored also because they do not represent the values or discourses on children as presented by adults. In an important instance, when asked about participation of children’s unions in international conferences, an International Labour Organization (ILO) expert stated, “It’s a bit like getting invited to a vegetarian party and then ‘talking about the advantages of eating meat’.”[xi] This statement suggests that the participation of working children is considered ‘irrelevant’ at such conferences because they contradict the mainstream representation of all working children as ‘vulnerable victims’.

We need a gradual shift from ‘ritualised humility’ practiced by international and national agencies to rethinking power dynamics when facilitating children’s participation.[xii] Ritualised humility is perilous because it uses children for tokenism as they speak in sync with the adult-centric views of the organisations involved instead of having a constructive dialogue with them. A key element of children’s representation would be recognising them as partners, acknowledging their concerns and aspirations as crucial in catapulting development efforts to achieve meaningful transformation.

 

Toward a child rights-based approach

Building on a rights-based approach, we need to create solutions by redirecting our focus, rectifying disparities, and championing a more inclusive and equitable global conversation on childhood. The North–South dichotomies in child-centric development can be addressed by cultivating mutual trust and support, engaging in joint decision making and acknowledging significant barriers to development, including a lack of resources and complex institutional or political landscape.

A key shift would be toward a child rights-based approach that integrates the perspectives of children and makes the initiatives more inclusive and efficient. Based on the vision of the CRC, the development interventions that target children in the Global South should look beyond the ‘management’ of participatory initiatives and consider the right of children to be heard while conceptualizing, developing, and executing projects in diverse contexts.[xiii] The right of every child to be heard means all children should be included in discussions that affect them and that development actors should create programmes based on the needs, views and opinions of the children affected.[xiv]

The Lundy Model for Child Participation is one example of an effective framework that can provide guidance for meaningful children’s participation across four interrelated concepts: space, voice, audience, and influence.[xv] And, keeping this in mind, we should further make a special effort to include children who face digital access barriers in developing countries.[xvi] The inadequate representation of children’s voices from the Global South due to restricted access and infrastructure does not mean these children lack perspectives. It indicates the need for increased efforts on equitable collaboration to generate high-quality evidence for researchers and policymakers to achieve better outcomes for children-focused initiatives. And most importantly, it is crucial to protect children’s identities when local safeguards are insufficient to protect their privacy or if criticizing national policies places them at additional risk.

 

[i] https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-child

[ii] https://www.refworld.org/legal/general/crc/2009/en/70207

[iii] See the General Comment 14 (2013) on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration: https://www.refworld.org/legal/general/crc/2013/en/95780

[iv] https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/06/1137567

[v] Read more on right to protection at work in this example of Bolivia: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Manfred-Liebel-2/publication/283280916_Protecting_the_Rights_of_Working_Children_instead_of_Banning_Child_Labour/links/5a45fdf0a6fdcce1971a94f3/Protecting-the-Rights-of-Working-Children-instead-of-Banning-Child-Labour.pdf

[vi] https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2023/Dec/25/india-may-miss-international-target-of-eliminating-child-labour-by-2025-2644709.html;  https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/children-from-bengal-rescued-as-bonded-labourers-return-to-chennai-to-resume-same-work-after-turning-18/article67811584.ece

[vii] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/13/covid-19-prompts-enormous-rise-in-demand-for-cheap-child-labour-in-india

[viii] https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—asia/—ro-bangkok/—sro-new_delhi/documents/publication/wcms_359371.pdf

[ix] https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/61843/978-3-031-04480-9.pdf?sequence=1#page=143

[x] https://www.concernedforworkingchildren.org/empowering-children/childrens-unions/

[xi] https://www.spiegel.de/international/tomorrow/child-labor-in-bolivia-is-legally-permissable-a-1130131.html

[xii] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1080/09578810701667508

[xiii] Read more about children’s right to be heard: https://www.refworld.org/docid/4ae562c52.html

[xiv] https://resourcecentre.savethechildren.net/pdf/5259.pdf/

[xv] https://www.qub.ac.uk/Research/case-studies/childrens-participation-lundy-model.html#:~:text=SPACE%2C%20VOICE%2C%20AUDIENCE%2C%20INFLUENCE&text=SPACE%3A%20Children%20must%20be%20given,be%20acted%20upon%2C%20as%20appropriate.

[xvi] https://jprm.scholasticahq.com/article/38764-online-intergenerational-participatory-research-ingredients-for-meaningful-relationships-and-participation

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Timisha Dadhich is an independent human rights consultant and holds a European Master’s Degree in Human Rights and Democratisation (EMA). She is also a trained criminal justice social worker who is very passionate about access to justice and reducing social inequalities. She has the experience of working with international organizations, national NGOs and government agencies in India on issues related to children’s right to participation, child protection, education and juvenile justice.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

Development Dialogue 19 | Dealing with difference in collaborative research

By Posted on 2044 views

Collaborative research is increasingly promoted as an ethical and participatory form of knowledge generation. However, as innovative as the approach is, collaboration can lead to frustration or conflict and may require much more resources in comparison to ‘classic’ research methodologies. While this has already been acknowledged, empirical evidence on the challenges researchers face when collaborating is still lacking. It is therefore pertinent to communicate about field experiences so that practitioners as well as educational and funding institutions can realistically consider the limits and requirements of this approach — something PhD researcher Maria Fernanda Córdova Suxo does in this article.

Image by Author

Collaborative research is a methodology used increasingly and especially by researchers from academic institutions, interdisciplinary teams, and community organizations to foster inclusive knowledge creation. This methodological approach emphasizes active participation in the knowledge production process, shared decision-making, and inclusive contributions from various stakeholders.[1] An anti-colonial critique is strongly present in this methodological approach, since it challenges dominant research practices, driving a change from conventional research roles of ‘the researcher’ and ‘the researched’ to a partnership where both parties actively co-create knowledge. In addition to challenging traditional research roles, the methodology aims to avoid the extraction and appropriation of knowledge that largely benefits the interests of the researcher instead of those of the target group. In this regard, collaboration has been positioned as a relevant approach for fostering inclusive development practices.

 

But does an ethical and participative approach suffice?

Simply considering collaborative research through the lens of equality and horizontal partnership dynamics doesn’t suffice to dismantle harmful knowledge production practices and to ensure an inclusive process of knowledge creation. Reality shows that relationships operate on multifaceted levels beyond ethical intentions alone. For one, fieldwork roles beyond the renaming and allocation of labels like ‘partner,’ ‘participant,’ or ‘co-researcher’ often stem from preconceptions influenced by past experiences and entrenched power structures, while additional or incompatible responsibilities and interests, influenced by historical, economic, and political conditions, will define collaboration. Drawing on my fieldwork experience during which I adopted a collaborative approach, in this article I review two situations where I encountered limits to doing collaborative research and discuss the way forward.

 

Does everybody aspire to be a co-researcher?

For my PhD research on the narrative construction of indigenous subjectivities within development discourses, I collaborated with the community of Caluyo, situated in the highlands near the historic ruins of Tiwanaku in La Paz, Bolivia. The aim was to collaborate in understanding and shaping collective identities, practices, and belief systems that inform a shared development perspective. I sought permission from the community assembly to initiate our collaboration by presenting my research topic and expressing my intention to work together during a community gathering in October 2021. I was granted permission and we could then start collaborating. I have visited the community for a period of three months each year for the past three years, participating in local activities such as assemblies, football tournaments, celebrations, planting and harvesting activities, as well as organizing workshops and conducting interviews.

Despite being from the same region and not encountering any language barriers, my presence brought with it pre-existing expectations. I wasn’t the first researcher to visit, nor was my collaborative engagement approach uncommon or unknown to them. Also, they were interested more in my educational experience — not necessarily in directly participating in the research but rather in how their ties to me could help foster opportunities for their children or grandchildren to access higher education or scholarships abroad.

During the several assemblies I attended, participants also expressed their desire to attract more researchers to the area to collaborate with the community, which they believed would aid in the systematization of knowledge. They were particularly interested in research on their culture and traditions that could further explain the pre-colonial era and the ruins that surrounded them. Their heavy labour on their land and farms, and their bureaucratic duties in the city, did not allow them to prioritize this task, as they perceived that it was important to communicate their traditional knowledge when interacting with visitors interested in it.

In this situation, I was thus asked to assume a traditional researcher role. Moreover, in Caluyo, the ancestral knowledge that researchers want to know about still needs to be understood by the community itself, with external researchers being seen as playing a role in helping facilitate this task. The traditional role of the researcher is found not only in this context but has also generated practices and trades that are predominantly — if not exclusively — located and validated in their interaction with the outside world.

 

Perspectives converging, realities diverging

Moreover, collaboration doesn’t guarantee a smooth ride in the research process; frustration and misunderstandings can arise. While I was in Caluyo, community members asked me to help them craft a project proposal for building a cultural center — something beyond the scope of my research. They sought my help since an official from the municipal government was charging them 2,000 bolivianos (around 270 euro) for this task — which they considered costly — and since I had project management experience.

I proposed conducting a joint workshop to draft the proposal — I would provide tools and expertise, but the vision for the cultural center and the project objectives would be theirs. We held the workshop in March 2023, inviting local authorities to collaborate. After four hours of work, the proposal had taken shape. I presented the document we had worked on to them and assured them that I would print three copies and bring them back to the community during my next visit.

They were skeptical about the proposal, however, asking me if we followed the correct procedure and wondering whether we needed an architect, since the municipal official they would have hired was an architect. I assured them that our work followed the requested plan and the funding format. A woman stood up and shared her experience in another community, where she was involved in drafting a similar project proposal. She had given money to an architect, and in return he gave her a book. She expected that the workshop I had organized would have the same outcome in the form of a book.

Murmurs filled the room after her comment, indicating their dissatisfaction with the process and outcomes. We had done things completely differently. This was the first time they were engaged in working out a project proposal, and they found it strange that this would come from an exchange of ideas and not from a professional voice like the architect’s, which gave them the feeling that something was not done right or that they had wasted their time. Once again, I explained that we had filled out all the requirements requested by the form to apply for funds and that if necessary and required afterwards, we could ask an architect to help. But at the moment, nothing indicated that we would need one for this proposal. The meeting ended with a small celebration, an apthapi (the communal sharing of food), which masked the disappointment of all the participants, including mine.

Despite their misgivings, they expressed their gratitude and I sent the prints and copies of the project proposal a week later, as I had promised. I took care to make these copies look like the books that were expected. These were eventually handed to the mayor during the town’s anniversary in May last year. The mayor stated his approval of the proposal and pledged that the cultural center would be realized. Construction began a couple of months ago, suggesting a successful collaboration.

 

Difference can cause distress

Although this experience is rich in insights into the procedure of setting up projects, I would like to highlight here the distressing aspects of the situation. Such interactions can highlight the inequalities and differences between participants. In the case I describe above, despite having a joint goal, the project proposal, our language, representations, and expectations of it varied considerably. Even though the project outcome was realized in the end, the community’s expectations and mine diverged, making it difficult for us to feel like we were truly co-creating something. The research dynamics of collaboration therefore demands adapting to interactions that are not contemplated beforehand.

In general, conflict, misunderstandings, and different expectations are inherent in such interactions where multiple visions come together but end up playing out differently. Ultimately, it is up to those we work with — so-called ‘research participants’ — to decide whether the research is collaborative, as my colleague Beatrice Gilbertini argued during one of the Development Dialogue’s panel discussions.

 

A way forward: embracing our differences

Many researchers and practitioners that seek a more participatory and ethical way of creating knowledge engage in participatory research. To date, there is enough literature reflecting on positionality and creating awareness to avoid extractive and appropriative research. However, relying solely on a reflective and ethical intention is insufficient — collaborative processes expose the real extent of differences and the depth of inequalities underlying these processes. Each encounter creatively illustrates these disparities, sometimes manifesting as conflicts and clashes. The question is then, what to do with it?

One way forward is to embrace these conflicts as opportunities to make methodological and theoretical adjustments that respond to the demands of those involved. The complexity of such interactions should be conveyed not with the aim of achieving equality between participants and researchers, but rather to understand the origins of these cleavages that reflect different interests and needs. Emphasizing an equal partnership as the sole criterion may obscure these gaps, potentially perpetuating violence.

Last, while collaborative practice should be promoted, it’s essential to ensure the provision of necessary resources and qualities demanded by such endeavours while preserving its inherent flexibility. It prompts us to consider whether there’s a need for more comprehensive research that is better integrated with entities beyond academia, such as social movements and civil society spaces, where theoretical work can truly be grounded in practical realities.

[1] See The SAGE Handbook of Action Research, for example.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Maria Fernanda Cordova Suxo is a PhD candidate in Sociology at the University of Kassel, specializing in the exploration of alternatives to development through the lens of social movements and indigenous peoples’ experiences. She holds a Master of Science degree in Critical Development Studies and a Master of Arts in Peace and Conflict Studies. Her professional background has predominantly revolved around international cooperation and humanitarian aid agencies. She currently teaches at the university and conducts workshops on global learning.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

What can the frugal innovation debate learn from the renewable energy debate?

By Posted on 1871 views

In this article, Hubert Schmitz and Peter Knorringa look into the pathways, processes, and coalitions necessary for achieving innovation, and compares the recent leaps in the renewable energy sector with the conditions to make frugal innovation practices a reality. They propose new ways of framing frugal innovation, borrowing from renewable energy campaigners, and propose new types of ‘coalitions of the willing’ that can help bring about innovation that is sparing of resources, and also accessible for people with lower incomes.

Photo by Andreas Gucklhorn via Unsplash

Making economic progress sustainable has become the central issue of our time.  Recent work on frugal innovation seeks to contribute to this challenge. This blog asks what the analysts and practitioners of frugal innovation can learn from the renewable energy debate. Frugal innovation is a young line of work compared with that on renewable energy, which has a long and prominent history.  It therefore makes sense to distil what the former can learn from the latter, particularly since both seek to contribute to the sustainability of human life on our planet.

The key attributes of frugal innovations are first, that they are sparing in the use of resources and second, that poor people can afford them. These features matter especially in poor countries but also for low-income people in rich countries. Frugal innovation is thus relevant for most of the world’s population and can contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals.  Here are some examples: low-cost ventilators that do not need electricity to help hospitals treating COVID patients; irrigation pumps that do not require diesel or electricity; safely sending and receiving money without a bank account.

 

What are we trying to achieve?

Our central concern is to find ways of making frugal innovations more common. Indeed, the central concern which underlies this blog is whether and how the development and uptake of frugal innovations can be accelerated.

There are of course examples of standard innovation that benefit poor people. Perhaps the best-known example is the mobile phone, which enables people to leapfrog fixed phone lines and organise their lives in a multitude of time saving ways: arrange meetings, make payments, negotiate deals, and access the latest information. The standard innovation process, however, is rarely driven by the concerns of poor people. On the contrary, the innovation process is usually targeted at the better off and benefits to the poor tend to be a by-product that emerges at a late stage in the product cycle. Support of frugal innovation aims to target lower income customers at an earlier stage and do so for many products. Even that is just half the battle.  The aim is to come up with products which are also sparing in the use of scarce resources.  Frugal innovation is about addressing the resource constraint and affordability criterion.  This is a tall order.

Another way of capturing the essence of frugal innovation is to talk about over-engineering.  Products tend to be over-engineered when the innovation process is not driven by concerns with affordability and material saving.  Most of us have ample experience of dealing with over-engineered products that are sophisticated and expensive, providing features which we rarely, if ever, use.  In contrast, we tend to have few products which result from frugal innovation. The aim is to help change that balance. But how?

In order to address this HOW question, some useful lessons can be learned from the renewable energy debate which has a longer history.  Replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy is essential for reducing carbon emissions responsible for the climate chaos (increasing frequency of extreme weather events) which we can now observe in many parts of the world. We will draw here in particular on the development and deployment of solar and wind energy, so far the most successful technologies in replacing fossil fuels. The literature on the energy transition is huge. In this blog we draw on two articles which have pulled together the most relevant lessons: Cameron Roberts, Frank Geels, Matthew Lockwood et al, 2018, ‘The politics of accelerating low-carbon transitions: towards a new research agenda’, Energy Research & Social Science 44, 304-311, and Hubert Schmitz, 2017, ‘Who drives climate relevant policies in the rising powers?’, New Political Economy 22:5, 521-540.

The first lesson is about framing.  The concern is to accelerate frugal innovation. We are not starting from scratch. This provides a space for celebrating the frugal technologies and the organisations which have brought them about. There is something to build on. Exploring frugal innovation is not a hopeless undertaking.  A framing in terms of accelerating progress also invites a discussion of why there is success in some cases and failure in others. Even if successes are rare, the comparison with failures makes for a more analytical debate.

The second lesson from the renewable energy debate is that the key problem is not technological but political. This seems to apply also to frugal innovation. Solutions which prioritise saving resources and being affordable can be found.  But the forces which drive the innovation tend to take the process into a different direction.  This became clear in a discussion we had with a senior EU official who was himself enthusiastic about the potential of frugal innovation but sceptical about getting it high onto the EU innovation policy agenda because ‘nobody lobbies for frugal innovation’.

 

The coalition perspective

This hint at politics takes us in the right direction but needs further thought.  The renewable energy debate helps us with this.  It suggests a political economy approach which takes four analytical steps:

  • Recognising that no single actor has the resources to bring about the transition to renewable energy.
  • Recognising that actors in government, business and civil society seek to advance or slow down the process.
  • Paying attention to alignments of interest across government, business and civil society.
  • Including actors with different motives and to understand these alignments.

Detailed empirical analysis has shown that these alignments of interest have made the difference at key moments in renewable energy promotion. The vocabulary used for these alignments varies,  some call them ‘coalitions’, others prefer ‘alliances’.  The breakthrough in the renewable energy debate came when it was recognised that those joining the coalition did not necessarily do so in order to fight climate change. Some were more concerned with securing energy for their region or company, others with building a new industry and creating jobs.  What mattered was not their motivation but their support for a particular piece of legislation or for a new programme or project. Often the resulting coalition was incidental, members happened to pull in the same direction for whatever reason.  In other cases, there was a consciously pursued strategy.  This distinction between incidental and strategic coalition seems useful as well.  Finally, it is important to realise that this coalition approach works both ways. It can help us to understand where and why progress was made. It can also help to understand where and why progress was held back.

In summary, climate-relevant renewable energy research has given us a language and an analytical apparatus which has the potential to advance the frugal innovation debate.  We will now discuss some specific ways in which this could be made to work.

 

Coalitions for frugal innovation?

How can the development and uptake of frugal innovation be accelerated?  This is our central question.  Adopting the coalition perspective means asking who is interested in frugal innovation – for whatever reason.  We will want to look for relevant actors in government (including inter-governmental organisation); in business (both domestic and foreign, both large and small); and in civil society (including academia). Let us start with the latter.

The first actor that comes to mind is us: the members and associates of the International Centre for Frugal Innovation. Most of us are academics, trying to understand the world and improve it. There are others pursuing the same objective but operating under a different heading. A notable example is ‘the circular economy’. We need to apply the coalition perspective to ourselves and reach out to the colleagues who use the circular economy approach. They have an even stronger emphasis on saving resources with their ‘Triple ‘R’ strategy (re-use, repair, recycle) and ‘extended producer responsibility’ for end-of-life disposal. Implementing this strategy requires above all organisational innovation.  Affordability is a less explicit objective, but it is implicit in their work. The important thing in adopting the coalition perspective is to concentrate on common ground and not on differences.  This can be uncomfortable in that the brand (frugal innovation, circular economy, appropriate technology) gives us a feeling of identity and sometimes also privileged access to a particular funder.

As policy-oriented researchers we need to work with people in government, concentrating not necessarily on ministries or departments but pockets within these ministries or departments that are interested in and relevant for our work.  Governments tend to work in silos. The coalition perspective makes us look across these silos and identify the most significant players who (can) support our work.  In seeking to identify these players, our question is not whether they have the same objective but whether their policies and projects affect what we want to achieve.  For example, there are often pockets in central or local government which seek to promote competitiveness in particular products and services.  If their policies make products or services more frugal, we will want to work with the government officials driving these policies whatever their rationale.  In practice this will often mean adopting a sector-specific or sub-sector specific approach. The International Centre for Frugal Innovation recently ran a course with entrepreneurs involved in horticulture. Most of them initially thought that ‘doing innovation’ was only for high-tech sectors with R&D labs. They were surprised how they could in a few sessions co-develop frugal innovations that created new markets for their products. For example, one entrepreneur developed a gift set of mini plants that could be ordered online and delivered through a physical mailbox.

If we are serious about accelerating frugal innovation, we need to work with business.  This is not easy.  We cannot expect business federations or chambers of industry and commerce to put frugal innovation on their banner. These organisations exist to lobby government and support the competitiveness of their members. Broad industry-wide pleas to pay more attention to frugality in their competitiveness strategy are unlikely to work.  Cheese producers operate in a world different from makers of electronic sensors or truck manufacturers or enterprises which specialise in shelving solutions.  At the sectoral level, however, it might be possible to identify enterprises that have developed frugal products, and which can make them more competitive in their home or international market. Asakawa et al (2019) show how this can be achieved in their article ‘Frugality-based Advantage’ (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0024630117305290).   Such positive examples are important to demonstrate that frugal innovation is not just desirable from an equality and sustainability perspective but can also be a good business strategy.  Working with such enterprises would be essential for making the coalition perspective work.

Business schools have good access to private enterprise and might become key allies.  There is fierce competition between business schools to attract the greatest talents.  Being relevant for the new age of sustainability is essential for business schools to succeed in this competition. ‘Frugal innovation’ provides them with a focus for achieving this.  This can be our entry point for working with business schools.  Such collaboration can help us with studying and promoting frugal innovation.

Identifying the relevant actors in a coalition is merely the first step.  There is a tested methodology for rapid political economy analysis which can then be used for the subsequent steps: mapping the actors according to whether they support or oppose specific policies or projects; according to how influential they are; according to their location in society (public, private, civic sectors); and according to their priorities (making money, enhancing competitiveness, minimising waste, protecting environment, reducing poverty).  There are simple ways of visualising these configurations of actors and identifying (potential) coalitions. These methods are of the ‘quick and dirty’ kind, more appropriate for rapid analysis than for PhD level research.

The analysis will then need to distinguish between incidental alignments of interest that come together just to get a particular law or project approved and coalitions which have a more enduring character with regular meetings on strategy and targets.  This is an important point. Coalitions need not be long term alliances, they can be short term for specific aims such as: reforming industrial policy, vocational training or industrial standards; exhibiting a new approach at a trade fair; or developing a new conceptual and practical course on ‘frugal innovation’ to be taught at business schools. Tracing where renewable energy made significant steps forward showed that this kind of coalition perspective helps to see political feasibility in a different – usually more optimistic – way.  In short, in order to accelerate the development and uptake of frugal innovations we need to come to grips with the politics of the process. Borrowing freely and selectively from those who have analysed the political economy of the energy transition is a promising way forward.

Aerial photo of solar panels in Offingen, Germany by Andreas Gucklhorn via Unsplash 

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the authors:

Professor Hubert Schmitz is a renowned development economist specializing in sustainable industrialization, investment politics, and green transformations with 40 years of expertise. An Emeritus Fellow at the Institute of Development Studies, he advises bilateral and multilateral development agencies. Known for concise policy research synthesis, he has managed international teams and focused recent research on the impact of the global power shift on low-carbon transformations and the drivers of climate-relevant policies.

 

Peter Knorringa, Professor at Erasmus University Rotterdam, specializes in the multifaceted influence of businesses on development. As the academic director of the International Centre for Frugal Innovation since 2013, he examines the developmental impact of frugal innovations. His broad research portfolio spans clustered SMEs, trust in value chains, and sustainability standards. With extensive experience in India, Vietnam, and other countries, he contributes to a nuanced dialogue on when and where entrepreneurs and firms contribute to inclusive and sustainable development.

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

Development Dialogue 19 | Reckoning with the past and imagining the futures of development research and practice

By Posted on 1745 views

The field of development studies is not estranged from critiques of extractive and hegemonizing policies and practices. In fact, development research and praxis are now undergoing a moment of reckoning as scholars and practitioners grapple with the limitations and shortcomings of dominant approaches to development. The recent Development Dialogue (DD) conference held at the ISS sought to create a space of resistance through dialoguing about these reckonings. In this article, the planning committee of the DD introduce a special blog series on discussions and presentations that took place at the conference as an opportunity for engagement outside of the normative to reckon development, the past, and to imagine futures outside of those confinements.

Image by Author

Development operates as a metaphysical order — it casts perceptions of space, place, times, and peoples which become edified by the practical action of “doing development”. As an ordering principle, it constructs the naturalized idea of the “commons” and its foil known under many names such as “the uncommon”,” the undeveloped”, “the underdeveloped”, “the differentiated”, or “the other”. Cast this way, development operates as an intangible or perhaps invisible force, enabling dispossession, transmogrification, extractivism, and rigidity.

Despite academia’s unrelentingly simplified engagement and resultant static forms of post-development, the creators/ enablers of development remain imperceptible, and development’s binaries remain entrenched in the “doing”. As scholars Moulton and Salo noted, these “doings” or norms of development frequently position communities of colour to be “raw material of development or the spatial excess that remains following meaningful development.”

 

Calling for a new reckoning

Calling for reckoning is not new but a longstanding demand from communities around the world who work to decolonize development by rethinking traditional development indicators and metrics and incorporating participatory and inclusive approaches. These approaches prioritize local knowledges and perspectives as well as social and environmental sustainability to focus on shifting power dynamics so plural and diverse world(s) can exist together.

The 19th Development Dialogue (DD)   that took place in November last year, contributed to this call for a new reckoning by serving as a space for resistance by collaboratively exploring the visions of practitioners, thinkers, and artists who look to confront the inequities and normative assumptions that position worlds within entrapments of colonial violence. The DD is a platform for PhD researchers to come together once a year at the ISS to engage in conversation and research sharing. Each iteration’s theme builds on the social happening of global events, serving as a metacommentary on the longstanding critique/ engagement with the field of development studies and development practice. The programme of the 19th DD can be found here.

 

Radical possibilities through imagination

As the planning committee, we sought to invoke the power of imagination to urge a transformative scholarship — from a current critical and disembodied positionality to one that generates space for radical possibilities and care for ourselves, for each other, and for the non-human world. Delinking from existing practices in which absence and erasure endure, we invoked the radical questioning of development through imagination and experience.

Radically questioning development in this context entails uncovering the binaries sustaining differentiation and the deeply racialized, gendered colonial legacies perpetuated in theorization and practice. In other words, making visible what systems, peoples, or policies constitute/legitimate harm and then promoting changing or delinking practices that transition away from that violence toward spaces of care. We find these conversations urgent, built on the longstanding calls for abolition, agency, and freedom for our own communities and others around the globe similarly confronted with inequity and injustice.

This blog series contributes to the conference’s goal by challenging where and how knowledge is produced and placing an emphasis on narratives to guide thinking on the transitions required in development and society writ large. The articles in this special series build on the interests of presenters of the 19th DD, who disproportionately come from the Global South.

 

Reckoning in different ways

The DD was organized along several sub-themes also reflected in this blog series that cogently addressed the experiences and geographically disjointed reckonings happening in our communities. These themes were intentionally broad in order to facilitate greater engagement with scholars/activists/artists of varying disciplines and practitioners from different fields. The themes were:

  1. Global north-south relations: reckoning with power imbalances and building more equitable partnerships
  2. Co-creation and co-design for development: fostering inclusive and collaborative development approaches
  3. Rethinking evaluation: past and future of how we measure development outcomes
  4. Approaches to reckoning and healing: including the role of indigenous knowledge and traditions
  5. Gender and sexuality in development research & practice: reclaiming our bodies and shaping our identities
  6. Challenging growth-oriented development: examining the limits of growth and the need for alternatives
  7. Environmental justice: examining the intersection of environmental degradation, climate change, and development, and exploring strategies for promoting environmental justice and sustainability
  8. Development and mobility, rethinking the tie: reckoning development effects in people on the move, displacement and (im)mobilities of things and people.

Indeed, the wide range of sub-themes demonstrates the entanglement of these concepts in the construction of our current world and the need to commune and collaborate towards resistance and refusal. This entails recognizing how scholars and disciplines are isolated in their respective academic silos and, more specifically, how this disconnection stifles conversation, requiring us to more rigorously integrate ourselves and our knowledges into these spaces and places to facilitate engagement across disciplines and sites.

 

Collectively recognizing our need to delink from the past

What became evident during the course of the dialogues was the prevalence and in some cases primacy of embedded logics that privileged “Western” or normative development thinking in research. However, equally prominent was the engagement to challenge the “normal” assumptions through panels, workshops, and conversations — whether outside of the formal setting of the conference or not. These conversations brought to the forefront a persistent sentiment across the dialogues, namely the common understanding that “the past cannot continue to constrain the future.” Linked to this understanding is the objective of identifying in what ways scholarship/art/doing can lead us to more equitable and free futures.

 

Embodied resistance through dialoguing

We found the conference to be a microcosm of conversations by and in communities of colour, conversations across spaces and times to reckon the “truths” and “invisibilities” of development in effort to conceive of futures outside of the current colonial matrix confinement. Engaging these reckonings, each embodied resistance and delinking from the academy’s normativity and institutional complicity gives insight into the generative as well as transformative narratives of healing, escape, liminality, and solidarity building outside of the defined temporal and spatial site of Man.

Transitioning beyond critique and outside of hierarchies of expert knowledge enables engagement with narratives that subvert and refuse universalisms, and in turn find solace and reprieve in openness and complexity. The aim of the DD was to foster solutions that may not have immediate answers by questioning the normative and holding space outside of the legacy of academia’s “research”. Thus, this blog series builds on the presentations and discussions from the DD19, spurred by workshops and lectures which further questioned relationships of power and the spatial and temporal locus of longstanding justice narratives and practices.

References

Escobar, A. (2021). Reframing civilization (s): From critique to transitions. Globalizations, 1–18.

Gilmore, R. W. (2022). Abolition geography: Essays towards liberation. Verso Books.

Gómez-Barris, M. (2017). The extractive zone: Social ecologies and decolonial perspectives. Duke University Press.

McKittrick, K. (2006). Demonic grounds: Black women and the cartographies of struggle. U of Minnesota Press.

Mignolo, W. (2018) “The conceptual Triad: Modernity/Coloniality/Decoloniality” in Mignolo, W. and Walsh, C. On Decoloniality: concepts, analytics, praxis, Durham: Duke University Press pp. 135–152.

Moulton, A. A., Davis, J., Van Sant, L., & Williams, B. (2019). Anthropocene, capitalocene,… plantationocene?: A manifesto for ecological justice in an age of global crises. Geography Compass, 13(5), e12438.

Moulton, A. A., & Salo, I. (2022). Black geographies and Black ecologies as insurgent ecocriticism. Environment and Society, 13(1), 156–174.

Motta, S. C. (2016). Decolonising critique: From prophetic negation to prefigurative affirmation. Social sciences for an other politics: Women theorizing without parachutes, 33–48.

Wynter, S. (2003). Unsettling the coloniality of being/power/truth/freedom: Towards the human, after man, its overrepresentation—An argument. CR: The new centennial review, 3(3), 257–337.

The 19th Development Dialogue (DD)  took place in November last year contributed to this call for a new reckoning by serving as a space for resistance by collaboratively exploring the visions of practitioners, thinkers, and artists who look to confront the inequities and normative assumptions that position worlds within entrapments of colonial violence. The DD is a platform for PhD researchers to come together once a year at the ISS to engage in conversation and research sharing. Each iteration’s theme builds on the social happening of global events, serving as a metacommentary on the longstanding critique/ engagement with the field of development studies and development practice. The programme of the 19th DD can be found here.

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Jonathan Moniz is a dedicated thinker deeply invested in radically questioning the issues that shape our contemporary reality. He engages in topics ranging from environmental issues, the role of law in perpetuating colonial relations, abolition, Black studies, and sustainable development issues.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Food Wars: Conflict, Hunger, & Globalization

By Posted on 2449 views

[vc_row css=”.vc_custom_1592900783478{margin-right: 0px !important;margin-left: 0px !important;}”][vc_column css=”.vc_custom_1592900766479{margin-right: 10px !important;margin-left: -10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]Conflict is a key driver of hunger crises, and most countries experiencing food wars rely heavily on primary product exports. In this blog, Marc Cohen and Ellen Messer claim that breaking these links among conflict, hunger, and globalization requires a right to food and livelihood security approach, stronger mechanisms to resolve conflicts, and the provision of impartial humanitarian assistance.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_single_image image=”27354″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes” alignment=”center” onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://pixabay.com/photos/army-conflict-weapon-war-gun-1835299/”%5D%5Bvc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]Over the past 30 years, most wars have been what we call “food wars.” In these conflicts, adversaries use food and hunger as weapons, and they intentionally or incidentally damage food supplies and food-related infrastructure. As a result, food insecurity persists long after the fighting stops. In turn, food insecurity is frequently a trigger or underlying cause of conflict.

In 2022 (the last year with complete data), the links between conflict and hunger were all too apparent, as crisis-level acute food insecurity reached the highest level ever recorded, with violent conflict a key driver. The number of forcibly displaced people reached an all-time high of 108.4 million people, with 70% in countries facing hunger crises.

 

Justifying the Link between Conflict and Hunger

We looked at 45 conflict, refugee-hosting, and conflict legacy countries with populations facing hunger crises—living at Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) 3 or higher. Acute food insecurity affected nearly 228 million people, accounting for 90% of the global population at IPC 3+. Conflict was a major cause in all 45 countries, although in some, weather extremes or economic shocks were the principal driver. The daily crude death rates associated with IPC 3 implicate conflict-related food insecurity in 6,400-17,600 daily fatalities. Because IPC does not include sex-disaggregated data, we can’t view these stark numbers with a gender lens.

Humanitarian agencies and academics recognize that conflict causes catastrophic hunger. They point to the humanitarian-development-peace Triple Nexus as essential to bridging silos separating emergency aid and food self-reliance. They also aim to build on local actions with due attention to peacebuilding, conflict-sensitivity, and humanitarian and human-rights norms.

There is another, often overlooked dimension to food wars. These crises generally occur in countries that rely heavily on primary product exports—gold and livestock in Sudan, petroleum in South Sudan and Yemen, cotton and cocoa in West Africa, coffee in Ethiopia, minerals in the DRC, and grain and oilseeds in Ukraine. Narco-crops featured prominently in Afghanistan’s and Colombia’s civil wars.

Paradoxically, most peacebuilding efforts see foreign direct investment and an export-oriented economy as a foundation for peace. But focusing on market liberalization without attention to inclusive and legitimate governance can worsen inequality, put countries into a dependent position in the global economy, and create the potential for renewed violence. For example, in Sierra Leone, large scale foreign investment in land, promoted to create jobs and boost tax revenues, has actually resulted in resentment, as many Sierra Leonians lack access to productive resources.

Across the 45 food wars countries, the average share of merchandise trade in GDP was 52%, compared to 40% for low- and middle-income countries. While these figures do not demonstrate causality, they show the clear correlation between globalization and food wars.

Natural resource abundance and dependence on high-value export crops can contribute to civil war outbreaks. In Sub-Saharan Africa, clearing of forests for commercial agricultural activities, often in violation of local laws and regulations, can deprive communities of livelihoods and foment violence and forced migration. Mining operations often have similar results. Markets for high value primary commodities need more careful vetting and regulation to avoid funding and fuelling conflict.

 

Hunger and Globalization Nexus

Globalization is not just global economic connections and liberalized trade and capital flows. It also includes international norms and institutions promoting humanitarianism, human rights, social justice, and fair trade—what we call “globalization’s bright side.”

Political and policy frameworks have in fact strengthened legal foundations for international interventions in food wars. In 2018, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 2417, condemning starvation as a war crime. But enhanced norms have not yet fostered accountabilities for “starvation crimes.”

Key to bridging the gap between principles and practice would be adoption of more holistic national development strategies, including food-systems approaches that protect and promote the right to food and livelihood security. Food and nutrition policy must also consider conflict, globalization, and climate change. All this requires stronger mechanisms to prevent and resolve conflicts, as well as commitment to provide humanitarian assistance without political conditionalities, taking a Triple Nexus approach. Likewise necessary are an understanding of conflict history and context, and inclusive actions that integrate local capacities, perceptions, and humanitarian leadership.

A key question is how to ensure private-sector social responsibility. Voluntary instruments don’t always deliver the desired outcomes. For example, the chocolate industry’s certifications that it is free from child labor have proved inadequate.

Related efforts seek to link export crops to peace, sustainable livelihoods, and environmental restoration. In Colombia, the Cocoa, Forests, and Peace Plan, supported by the Colombian government, international NGOs, and the private sector, seeks to bolster the livelihoods of small-scale cocoa farmers—many of them women—in sustainable production. Scaling up such promising initiatives remains a work in progress.

 

Policy Direction for Addressing the Links between Conflict and Hunger

The simple answer to the question, “Why is it so hard to break the links between conflict and hunger?” is that these situations involve multiple stressors, including climate and economic volatilities, and are embedded in historical and political-geographic structures of violence. Religious, cultural-political, energy, and other natural-resource factors complicate the regional and global alliances that influence food flows and conflict, particularly in places characterized by severe inequalities and suffering. Economic shocks related to the Russia-Ukraine war have reduced availability of fuel and fertilizer, and increased price volatility in export crop markets, exacerbating conflict-hunger links.

Agricultural export commodities are important sources of revenue for smallholder farmers and governments in conflict-affected, food-insecure countries. Understanding the conflict implications of export- and food-crop value chains is essential for sound policies to address food wars. The supportive involvement of private-sector actors, all along the value chains of these products, could be crucial in charting pathways forward that favor peace. To facilitate such involvement, UN agencies and NGOs should vet and critique foreign investment in land and water from a human rights perspective. Greater transparency around such issues as child and slave labor and environmental impacts could help bring more products into line with environmental and human values.

This blog is based on the authors’ presentation at the 7th International Humanitarian Studies Conference in November 2023.

[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1706777642574{margin-top: 0px !important;}”]About the authors:

Marc J. Cohen (marc22102@aol.com) was Lead Researcher, Aid, Development Finance, and Food Security at Oxfam until his retirement in September 2023.

 

 

 

Ellen Messer (messereg@gmail.com) is Visiting Associate Professor at the Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University. Previously, she was Director of the World Hunger Program at Brown University.

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column css=”.vc_custom_1596795191151{margin-top: 5% !important;}”][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text][newsletter][/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Mind the Queer Gap: Bisexual Invisibility in the Women, Peace, and Security Agenda

By Posted on 3846 views

With several ongoing conflicts, researcher Isabella Cordua considers how Bisexual invisibility in general has contributed to a lack of attention paid to Bisexual people in conflict, and calls for more focus to be placed on LGBTQI+ people, and Bisexual people in particular in the WPS Agenda. [

Image by Adobe Stock

The LGBTQ+ community worldwide continues to grapple with violence, discrimination, and marginalisation, all of which are intensified during conflicts. Reports of violence are all too common – last year, a store owner in the United States was killed following a dispute over displaying a rainbow Pride flag outside her business. Meanwhile, in Uganda, a 20-year-old man faces “aggravated homosexuality” charges, punishable by death under recent homophobic legislation. In Australia, a new report shows that one in two transgender Australians have experienced online and offline anti-trans hate this year, intensified by the proliferation of unchecked anti-trans rhetoric.

However, there is a significant lack of efforts targeted at addressing violence against the queer community, especially during conflict. Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security (WPS), adopted by the Security Council in 2000, largely neglects LGBTQ+ experiences. This oversight persists even though the hatred directed at members of the LGBTQ+ community is fundamentally rooted in the same harmful gender norms and heteronormative female/male binary that create a permissive space for violence against women and girls.

Obtaining LGBTQ+ statistics, especially in countries that criminalise identities outside of the heteropatriarchal binary, can be difficult. However, a study in the US, Canada, Australia, and Norway found that bisexuals make up the majority of the LGBTQ+ community. Paradoxically, they remain under-researched and overlooked by the peace and security community, even when we consider the lack of focus around LGBTQ+ people as a whole.

 

Bisexual Invisibility in Society as a whole

Bisexual people often receive limited support and representation within the LGBTQ+ community, leading to minimal dedicated efforts and funding, of which bisexual women, for example, receive less than 1%. Bisexual men face even greater invisibility due to social stigma, and programming for bisexual genderqueer individuals is virtually non-existent.

The term bisexuality has long been the subject of debate. While it is assumed that the prefix “bi” refers to attraction to only two genders, bisexuality is better understood as homosexual and heterosexual attraction. Thus, bisexuality is a radical critique of heteronormative patriarchal morals and monosexual identity.

 

Compounded Vulnerabilities of Queer and Bisexual Individuals in Conflict

Bisexual individuals tend to be excluded from both heteronormative culture and the LGBTQ+ community, especially when they are in heterosexual relationships. They are labelled as “confused” or merely going through a “phase”. Exclusion thus occurs twice: deemed “too gay” and “too straight” at once, they are pressured to conform to monosexual norms and often feel “alienated” and emotionally “homeless.”

The pressure to conform to hegemonic masculine norms can endanger bisexual men, whose sexuality may be seen as conflicting with societal expectations of the “real man”. Top of FormBottom of Form Meanwhile, bisexual women may face comparable discrimination and abuse to lesbians when they are in same-sex relationships or express same-sex desires, betraying patriarchal assumptions around women’s perceived dependence on men.

Bisexuals often feel compelled to conceal their sexual orientation, particularly during conflicts, to conform to societal norms. While the ability to “pass” as heterosexual may be seen as a privilege, the necessity to do so to avoid harm constitutes a form of violence in itself.

Bisexuals’ nonconformity can see them stereotyped as promiscuous and untrustworthy. These harmful perceptions make them more vulnerable to sexual and gender-based violence, particularly “corrective” rape perpetrated in an effort to “cure” them. In sexually repressive communities, these stereotypes heighten risks, driven by the urge to control bodies, particularly female bodies, and sexuality against heteropatriarchal norms.

Since violence and targeting of those who do not conform to hegemonic masculinity intensify amid conflict, bisexual people’s challenge to binary expressions of sexual orientation deserves greater attention from peace and conflict specialists. To start with, the WPS agenda needs to be reframed to better accommodate intersectional gender perspectives that address the multiple ways that gendered discrimination is experienced. This approach can provide better insights for addressing violence in both times of peace and war.

 

Expanding Gender Inclusion in the WPS Agenda

Resolution 1325 marked a shift in recognising women in conflict beyond victimhood, yet embraced an essentialist interpretation of their role. Critics argue that the WPS agenda conflates ‘women’ and ‘gender,’ promoting a binary view and limiting its focus to cisgender, heteronormative women, ignoring broader gender perspectives in conflict.

This binary and essentialist approach limits the scope and effect of the WPS agenda, which fails to address any departure from the ideal of the “asexual good woman.” Expressions of sexuality challenging this norm are seen as barriers to women’s participation in peace efforts. Indeed, the WPS agenda overlooks lesbian, bisexual, and transgender women, leaving their unique experiences of conflict-related violence unaddressed.

As is, the WPS agenda fails to recognise that all forms of gender-based violence stem from harmful gender norms that perpetuate the subordination of women and devalue femininity in favour of a specific hegemonic masculinity. This omission alienates gay and bisexual men and transgender and non-binary individuals, who face violence due to their identities and sexual orientation. It also hinders conflict resolution efforts and perpetuates the invisibility of queer experiences.

To truly address gendered violence in conflict and promote lasting peace, the WPS agenda must evolve to include the experiences of LGBTQ+ individuals. Queerness can be a major factor that makes individuals vulnerable to violence in conflict settings and needs to be better understood.

The bisexual community navigate unique challenges due to their defiance of heteropatriarchal norms and monosexual morals. Yet, their experiences remain invisible also because they are often grouped within the broader LGBTQ+ framework, which is itself overlooked.

Image Credit: https://stock.adobe.com/ie/images/a-rainbow-flag-standing-tall-amid-the-destruction-of-war-lgbtq-pride-flag/631638932

Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.

About the author:

Isabella Cordua is a Rotary Peace Fellow at the University of Queensland. Before receiving the fellowship, Isabella worked as Research Coordinator at the Network for Empowered Aid Response (NEAR). She has previously led research and advocacy for other renowned organisations, including Global Insight, the Cyrus R. Vance Center for International Justice, AdvocAid, and Defence for Children Sierra Leone.

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.

 

Contested Spaces and Narratives at COP28: A Reflection Piece

By Posted on 2182 views

In this blog, ISS MA student Manju von Rospatt reflects on her experiences at the UN Climate Change conference (COP28) held in Dubai from December 6 to December 13. Manju attended COP28 representing Eutopya and interviewed stakeholders and attendees at COP and contrasts the approach of indigenous, youth, and Global South representatives with the glitz of lobbyists from industry, and representing some of the biggest countries attending.

Image by Author.

From December 6th – December 13th, I took a short break from my regular academic routine at ISS to enter a very different world of high-stakes negotiations around climate change: the controversial and consequential 28th Conference of the Parties (COP28) in the United Arab Emirates. Attending COP28, the largest climate conference to date, in Dubai was a dizzying experience. Like many participants, I entered the conference with ambivalence, unsure what the week would have in store both for me and the final statement. The news coverage that we read about COP28 in the mainstream media tends to be dominated by the progression of the formal (and closed door) negotiations processes taking place between the 200 member states of the UNFCCC. Yet, attending COP28 was so much more than following the official negotiations and drafting of the agreement text.

 

Clashing narratives and crossing paths

Together with the international youth media group Eutopya, I interviewed a host of people across countries and roles at the conference, from indigenous and youth leaders, environmental justice activists, and civil society leaders to researchers, negotiators, and politicians. If you’re interested in these interviews, please look out for updates from our podcast in the following weeks. Speaking to a cross-section of people across age, ethnicity, gender, sectors, roles, and regions, gave me a sense of how COP28 is a contested space, rife with contradictions between various factions campaigning with different methods and interests. Each constituency proposed different solutions: technological, market-based, political, social, or spiritual. Cognitive dissonance permeated my time at COP28, as I jumped between conversations and events with climate justice advocates calling for people-centred just transitions and with organizations focused on energy transitions alone. I found fewer spaces than I had hoped at COP28 that brought these disparate perspectives together into a holistic approach. I found that people tended to stay within their constituency bubbles through self-selection whilst at COP28. Several interviewees also commented that the spatial distribution of pavilions across the Expo City venue further facilitated the segregation of interest groups. Even within buildings at the conference, pavilions were juxtaposed in glaring ways. For example, to visit the climate justice and indigenous youth pavilions, one needed to walk past two floors of pavilions of large energy companies and organizations, including OPEC.

The national pavilions, with multi-million dollar price tags, featured carefully curated narratives of national sustainability. These were further presented and performed by country representatives at side-events. Clearly, green-diplomacy has become an opportunity for many countries to green-wash, exercise soft-power, and legitimize state activities.

The corporate presence at COP was also striking, particularly in the open and commercialized Green Zone,  has been likened to a trade fair.

Single-Person Electric Helicopter featured in the Green Zone

Alongside COP28, I attended the private-sector event World Climate Summit, hosted in a glitzy hotel by the World Trade Center. I heard mining executives explicitly discuss how to maintain and enlarge profit margins, by including corporate social responsibility and sustainability as a flashy ‘side initiative’.

Luxury Electric Car Shows in the Green Zone at COP28

At an event hosted by Chilean mining corporation SQM on “sustainable lithium mining,” an audience member, a mining executive from Nigeria, explicitly initiate a business deal mid-Q&A to expand mining operations together with SQM. Their explicit concerns about expanding profit with the transition towards renewables and disregard to rhetoric around sustainability could not differ more from the ones I heard from civil society.

 

Separate spaces for differing ‘solutions’

Coming from a social justice perspective, I was particularly interested in how indigenous leaders, youth groups, and Global South environmental justice advocates would position themselves at the conference, which was bound to focus mostly on the energy transition. I was curious as to what kinds of tension would emerge between the mainstream narratives and voices at the margins of the conference. According to Asad Rehman, Executive Director of War on Want, this was the first year in which civil society and climate justice organizers were able to secure an official pavilion. At past COPs, organizers would gather at the margins of the venues, hosting meetings on the lawn, benches, and cafes. Across interviews with civil society members, I heard that protests at COPs were increasingly prone to UN securitization and oversight. At the same time, formalized channels for CSO constituencies and youth representative negotiators are incrementally included in the formal COP negotiation process. Despite this progress, corporate and national interests glaringly dominate the COP process.

During the six days I spent at COP, I witnessed and participated in several protests in the UN-designated blue zone of the Expo City (the Green Zone lies within UAE’s jurisdiction and has a zero tolerance policy for protests). The protests called for everything from calling for negotiators to add the phrase “phase out of fossil fuels” to the final text, climate reparations through sovereign debt cancellation for African countries, ceasefire in Palestine, and centering indigenous voices. Among smaller daily protests, a large protest organized by the COP28 coalition of CSOs on December 9th made history; activists marched through the conference venue, demanding their voices to be heard.

Farooq Tariq, General Secretary Pakistan Kissan Rabita Committee (PKRC) and president Haqooq Khalq Party, speaking to protestors about climate justice

On December 11, the COP28 coalition organized another historic event, the “People’s Plenary”, in counter-response to the market-based, technocratic and Eurocentric approaches to climate change mitigation and adaptation.

Historic People’s Plenary on December 11th featuring climate justice speakers

Many activists I spoke with were particularly concerned about the location of COP28 in the authoritarian UAE as well as COP29 which will be held in Azerbaijan. Following UNFCCC regulations, all slogans, posters, and routes had to be planned with and approved days in advance by executive members of the UNFCCC secretariat, upon risk of being ‘debadged’ (having your access to the Conference taken away) and deported if the agreements were not upheld. Following the UN’s rules, organizers needed to refrain from phrases directly mentioning Israel or the US and avoid “Free Palestine” calls, though the more neutral “Ceasefire Now” was permitted.  I also heard multiple stories from interviewees of intimidation and debadging against climate activists from the UN security officers.

Final protest on the evening of December 12th as negotiators finalize the wording of the text

A final agreement written to serve corporate interests

As I write this now, the final COP28 document has passed, hailing “the beginning of the end to fossil fuel” due to the unanimous acknowledgment of the need to transition away from oil, coal, and gas. Yet, the final product of the non-binding agreement is full of frustratingly vague and softened language which will allow for many loopholes without clear targets or timing. Language such as “phasing-down unabated coal power” and “phasing out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies” clearly reflect the lack of scientists present at the conference (estimated at 0.5% of overall attendees) and high influence of fossil fuel lobbyists (with some 2,456 lobbyists present) and the political influence of OPEC. OPEC’s strategy was to have member states reject any language on phasing out fossil fuel production and rather push for language on reducing fossil fuel emissions, enabling further extraction and profit with promises of dubious carbon capture and storage technology.

Civil Society forms an unauthorized chain of solidarity, whispering “please support the phase out” to negotiators, in front of the entrance of the room in which final negotiations take place.

Though the outcome of COP28 has been a deep disappointment for many, it is a start: a beginning of the end to fossil fuels. I feel inspired by the fierce energy and tireless conviction with which civil society and activists, especially youth, have campaigned to build their coalition-based collective power. Without the pressure and demands of civil society, processes like COP would be even more susceptible to corporate and elite capture. I feel honored to have been present and witnessed history in action and know that the climate justice movement will only expand from here.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text]Opinions expressed in Bliss posts reflect solely the views of the author of the post in question.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator color=”custom” accent_color=”#a80000″ css=”.vc_custom_1594895181078{margin-top: -15px !important;margin-bottom: 10px !important;}”][vc_column_text css=”.vc_custom_1702979927530{margin-top: 0px !important;}”]About the author:

Manju von Rospatt is an MA student at ISS in the Social Policy for Development Major and producer for Eutopya, an international youth media group. She is also an intern at the African Diaspora Policy Center. Manju’s interests center on issues of climate justice, labor migration, transnational networks, gender equality, rural development, and social protection, especially within the South and Southeast Asian context. Manju attended COP28 this year with Eutopya, interviewing various stakeholders, from climate justice activists and civil society groups to politicians and COP negotiators.  Please follow along with the podcast on Spotify!

 

Are you looking for more content about Global Development and Social Justice? Subscribe to Bliss, the official blog of the International Institute of Social Studies, and stay updated about interesting topics our researchers are working on.